A Qualitative Analysis of Ethical Perspectives on Recruitment and Consent for Human Intracranial Electrophysiology Studies.
neurosurgery
Informed consent
neuroethics
research
Journal
AJOB neuroscience
ISSN: 2150-7759
Titre abrégé: AJOB Neurosci
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 101518076
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
01 2021
01 2021
Historique:
entrez:
2
2
2021
pubmed:
3
2
2021
medline:
10
4
2021
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Intracranial electrophysiological research methods, including those applying electrodes on the cortical surface or in deep structures, have become increasingly important in human neuroscience. They also pose novel ethical concerns, as human studies require the participation of neurological patients undergoing surgery for conditions such as epilepsy and Parkinson's disease. Research participants in this setting may be vulnerable to conflicts of interest, therapeutic misconception, and other threats to valid recruitment and consent. We conducted semi-structured interviews with investigators from NIH-funded studies involving recording or stimulation inside the human skull. We elicited perspectives on study recruitment and consent procedures, and analyzed transcripts using a modified grounded theory approach. We interviewed 26 investigators from 19 separate intracranial electrophysiology studies, who described two study types: opportunity studies (
Identifiants
pubmed: 33528320
doi: 10.1080/21507740.2020.1866098
pmc: PMC8168380
mid: NIHMS1700923
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Research Support, N.I.H., Extramural
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
57-67Subventions
Organisme : NIA NIH HHS
ID : K01 AG057796
Pays : United States
Organisme : NIMH NIH HHS
ID : R01 MH114860
Pays : United States
Organisme : NINDS NIH HHS
ID : R01 NS090913
Pays : United States
Commentaires et corrections
Type : CommentIn
Type : CommentIn
Type : CommentIn
Type : CommentIn
Type : CommentIn
Type : CommentIn
Type : CommentIn
Type : CommentIn
Références
J Neurosci. 2018 Dec 12;38(50):10586-10588
pubmed: 30541767
Int J Law Psychiatry. 1982;5(3-4):319-29
pubmed: 6135666
J Neurosurg. 2017 Jan;126(1):122-131
pubmed: 26918474
Neurosurgery. 2018 Jul 1;83(1):29-37
pubmed: 28973530
Circ Cardiovasc Qual Outcomes. 2013 May 1;6(3):367-70
pubmed: 23652736
Am J Bioeth. 2019 Apr;19(4):11-18
pubmed: 30994425
Neuron. 2015 Apr 8;86(1):68-78
pubmed: 25856487
AMA J Ethics. 2017 Sep 1;19(9):862-872
pubmed: 28905727
BMC Med Ethics. 2011 Sep 27;12:18
pubmed: 21943406
IRB. 2002 May-Jun;24(3):1-6
pubmed: 12848185
Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci. 2015 May 19;370(1668):
pubmed: 25823863
J Gen Intern Med. 2006 Aug;21(8):867-73
pubmed: 16881949
Am J Bioeth. 2006 Jul-Aug;6(4):37-47
pubmed: 16885104
Nat Rev Neurosci. 2005 Jan;6(1):35-47
pubmed: 15611725
BMJ. 2008 Aug 07;337:a567
pubmed: 18687728
J Empir Res Hum Res Ethics. 2011 Mar;6(1):3-19
pubmed: 21460582
Am J Bioeth. 2019 Apr;19(4):28-30
pubmed: 31544674
JAMA Neurol. 2019 Oct 17;:
pubmed: 31621797
Neurosurg Clin N Am. 2014 Jan;25(1):103-16
pubmed: 24262903
JAMA Neurol. 2015 Jul;72(7):823-9
pubmed: 25961887
Neuron. 2018 Oct 10;100(1):19-36
pubmed: 30308169
Bioethics. 2013 Nov;27(9):500-7
pubmed: 22493972
Am J Bioeth. 2015;15(4):80-2
pubmed: 25856617
IRB. 2009 Sep-Oct;31(5):7-14
pubmed: 19873836