Which of the Following Is Not Something That Research Reading Requires You to Understand?
Breathe (Sheff). 2018 Jun; 14(two): 145–152.
How to obtain informed consent for research
Sara Manti
1University of Messina, "Thousand. Martino" Hospital, Messina, Italy
Amelia Licari
twoUniversity of Pavia, Fondazione IRCCS Policlinico San Matteo, Pavia, Italy
Curt abstract
The process of obtaining informed consent for clinical trials is tightly regulated; complications ascend in circumstances when consent may be waived, or when needed from vulnerable populations http://ow.ly/rEMe30j5MVq
Current biomedical research on man subjects requires clinical trial, which is defined as "any research study that prospectively assigns human participants or groups of humans to 1 or more wellness-related interventions [i.e. drugs, cells or other biological products, surgical procedures, devices] to evaluate the effects on wellness outcomes" [1]. In our modernistic ethical formulation, all enquiry conducted on humans must be pre-emptively accepted by the subjects themselves through the procedure known as informed consent, which is a process past which "a subject voluntarily confirms his or her willingness to participate in a particular trial, after having been informed of all aspects of the trial that are relevant to the subject's decision to participate", equally stated in the International Quango for Harmonisation Skillful Clinical Practice guidelines [two]. Informed consent is documented past ways of a written, signed and dated informed consent form. This form is required in the following cases: 1) when the research involves patients, children, incompetent/incapacitated persons, salubrious volunteers, immigrants or others (east.g. prisoners); 2) when the research uses/collects human genetic cloth, biological samples or personal data [three].
The informed consent form must exist written in linguistic communication easily understood past the subjects, information technology must minimise the possibility of coercion or undue influence, and the subject must exist given sufficient time to consider participation. Yet, informed consent is not merely a course that is signed, but is a process in which the subject area has an understanding of the research and its risks, and information technology is tightly described in ethical codes and regulations for human subject enquiry [ii].
The informed consent procedure
The voluntary expression of the consent by a competent subject and the acceptable information disclosure about the enquiry are critical and essential elements of the informed consent process [4]. Competent subjects able to embrace the research-related data should personally decide and provide the consent on research participation. Conditions posing applied challenges in obtaining informed consent from the real subject may include situations of medical emergency or obtaining consent from "vulnerable" subjects and/or children [5].
Research-related information must be presented to enable people to voluntarily decide whether or not to participate as a research subject. For an ethically valid consent, information provided to a research subject should include, but not be limited to: data almost the wellness condition for which the inquiry is proposed; details of the nature and purpose of the inquiry; the expected duration of the field of study's participation; a detailed description of study treatment or intervention and of whatever experimental procedures (including, in the case of randomised clinical trials (RCTs), also blinding and randomisation); a statement that participation in research is voluntary; probable risks and benefits associated with research participation; details of the nature of the illness and possible outcome if the condition is left untreated; availability, risks and benefits of culling treatments; data about procedures adopted for ensuring data protection/confidentiality/privacy, including elapsing of storage of personal information; details about the handling of any incidental findings of the inquiry; description of any planned genetic tests; details of insurance coverage in instance of injury; reference contacts for any further answers to pertinent questions virtually the research and the subject's rights and in example of whatever research-related injury to the subject area; and whatsoever other information that seems necessary for an informed determination to be taken by the subject. Of item importance, a argument offering the subject the opportunity to withdraw at any time from the enquiry without consequences must be provided during the information disclosure [2]. Specific data should exist provided in instance of research projects involving children, incapacitated adults not able to give informed consent, illiterate populations, etc. (as will be described after in this article).
The information about the inquiry should be given by a medico or by other individuals (i.e. researchers) with advisable scientific grooming and qualifications [6]. Furthermore, the location where the informed consent is being discussed, and the subject's physical, emotional and psychological capability, must be taken into consideration when taking consent from a human subject.
Informed consent: when is it not necessary?
Subsequently institutional review board (IRB) or contained ethics committee approval is achieved, obtaining informed consent from each human subject prior to his/her participation in clinical trial is mandatory [5]. Even so, when specific circumstances occur, the informed consent can be waived, and "research without consent" is possible, which allows enrolment of patients without their consent, under strict regulation [7]. In order that enquiry without consent is considered justifiable, the following three conditions accept to exist met: i) it is impracticable to obtain consent, 2) the research does not infringe the principle of self-determination, and 3) the enquiry provides significant clinical relevance [viii].
The first condition, of "impracticability", occurs when obtaining informed consent is burdened by high impact in terms of time and economic resources or could compromise the written report's validity [8]. The second condition ways that, although physicians are requested to ensure that the patient has understood the aim of the research and the risks and/or benefits associated with report participation, the researchers are likewise advised to respect the patient'south decision-making capacity, non interfering with his/her decisions and acting always in the patient'due south best involvement [9]. The third condition leads to justification of waiving consent when the clinical relevance and public health importance are potentially high [viii].
The formal literature identifies different types of RCTs and classifies them into three macro-areas: 1) RCTs based on infeasibility of informed consent; 2) RCTs that omit informed consent but for control groups; and 3) RCTs that omit informed consent entirely.
RCTs based on infeasibility of informed consent
Emergency clinical studies, involving critically sick subjects, represent an exception to the requirement of informed consent. The investigated life-saving therapy and the medical intervention may exist required immediately, not permitting the researchers to wait and respect all procedures of obtaining informed consent. Within this context, the researchers will be able to go along with patient recruitment, also without the discipline's consent to handling, when, prior to the study, the IRB has ascertained the presence of mandatory conditions (table ane) [10].
Tabular array 1
Weather condition to be met in emergency clinical study
| • Subjects affected past a life-threatening condition |
| • The handling is experimental |
| • The clinical research allows verification of both the effectiveness and safety of the treatment |
| • Information technology is impracticable to obtain consent |
| • The waiver of informed consent is needed for the clinical trial |
| • The researcher will contact the legally authorised representative |
| • The family unit members can decline the patient'due south participation in the study |
Cluster randomised studies include cluster-cluster and individual-cluster research [11]. In cluster-cluster designs (eastward.g. studies on infectious disease prevention), the intervention involves the entire target customs, so that single subjects cannot refuse it [12]. Conversely, in private-cluster designs (e.thousand. studies on master care), although the intervention involves all the selected customs, the right to reject treatment is immune. Under this circumstance, the omission of informed consent is justified only when the handling refusal undermines the validity of the enquiry study and/or procedures [13].
RCTs that omit informed consent only for control groups
In Zelen'due south single-consent model (east.yard. RCTs in infectious or oncological diseases), randomisation occurs prior to whatsoever consent, and informed consent is sought only from individuals assigned to experimental treatment [14]. In the control grouping, the physicians do not make substantial changes in routine patient care, then informed consent is not required for patient enrolment [8].
In order to improve study recruitment, Zelen developed the double-consent design. Specifically, informed consent is requested for subjects to be involved in the study but not for the randomisation, preventing psychological distress [xiv].
In follow-up studies, the nested consent model (eastward.g. for single cohort studies) or accomplice multiple RCTs model (e.thousand. for multiple cohort studies) is applied. In these variants, patients give their consent for prospective follow-up; withal, they remain blinded to whatsoever randomised experimental interventions [fifteen].
In trials using the model of "consent to postponed information", the informed consent process is carried out afterward the study is completed [16].
All these RCT types aim to avoid unnecessary stress in patients who will not receive the new promising experimental treatment. Moreover, these clinical written report designs do non affect the standard therapeutic approach or infringe the rights of the patients in the command group; therefore, the clinical trial can proceed without obtaining informed consent [8].
RCTs that omit informed consent entirely
Based on the fact that patients are assigned to standard care interventions, no informed consent is sought either in low-risk pragmatic RCTs [17] or in prompted optional randomisation trials [18, nineteen]. However, in a depression-risk pragmatic RCT, patients do not take the possibility to cull one of the two standard treatments, whereas in a prompted optional randomisation trial, both the researchers and the enrolled patients tin choose one type of handling over another, despite the randomisation results [6].
Special needs: vulnerable patients
A "vulnerable population" is defined as a disadvantaged community subgroup unable to make informed choices, protect themselves from inherent or intended risks, or go along their own interests safeguarded [20]. In the wellness domain, "vulnerable populations" refers to physical vulnerability (e.g. meaning women, fetuses, children, orphans, students, employees, prisoners, the military, and those who are chronically or terminally sick), psychological vulnerability (cognitively and intellectually impaired individuals) and social vulnerability (those who are homeless, from indigenous minorities, are immigrants or refugees) [20].
Due to a compromised free will and inability to make conscious decisions, several ethical dilemmas (related to communications, privacy and treatment) often ascend when research involves these populations. Guaranteeing protection of rights, safety, data privacy and confidentiality of vulnerable subjects are prerogatives of good clinical practice, and law dispositions are regulated and strictly monitored by the applicable authorities [21].
Physical vulnerability
For a long time, pregnant women were excluded from clinical research because of their "vulnerability". Although pregnant women are able to make informed and witting choices, they have been considered "vulnerable" due to the potential risks to the fetus, who is also considered as a "patient" [22]. More recently, with the consideration of pregnant women as "scientifically circuitous" rather than "vulnerable" subjects, information technology has been permitted to involve this category in research trials [23]. The "scientific complexity" reflects both upstanding and physiological complexity. The ethical aspects are secondary to the need to find a balance between interests of the fetus and the female parent. The physiological aspects are strictly related to the pregnancy status [24].
Enquiry studies involving meaning women and fetuses take to satisfy specific federal regulations (table 2). The following appropriate precautions should exist taken in research studies involving pregnant women: no pregnant woman may be involved equally a bailiwick in a human clinical research project unless the purpose of the research is to meet the health needs of the mother and the fetus will be placed at risk but to the minimum extent necessary to meet such needs, or the chance to the fetus is minimal [25].
Table 2
Weather condition to be met in research studies involving significant women and fetuses
| • In vivo studies have also been conducted on pregnant animals |
| • Clinical studies have been conducted on nonpregnant women |
| • Clinical findings assessing potential harms to pregnant women and fetuses are bachelor |
| • The risk to the fetus is minimal and acquired exclusively past the procedure/intervention |
| • The study will achieve crucial knowledge non obtainable by any other means |
| • The researchers will accept no part in whatsoever conclusion influencing fetal viability or pregnancy |
| • No incentive volition exist provided to influence the course of pregnancy |
Researchers can enrol meaning women only when the mother and/or the father are legally competent. In fact, the consent to participate in research may be either self-directed (simply the female parent'due south consent is required) or made with the guidance of the woman's partner. However, the father's consent need non be obtained when: one) the inquiry activity is directed to the wellness needs of the mother; 2) the father'due south identity is hundred-to-one; 3) the begetter is absent; or 4) a pregnancy from rape has occurred [26]. The consent signature requirements from the mother and begetter are summarised in tabular array 3. Once the informed consent is obtained, the pregnant women volition exist included into any stage of the report unless the research project will be compromised or the patient'south wellness (mother and/or fetus) volition exist in danger.
Table iii
Consent signature requirements for pregnant women and children
| For meaning women | |
| Straight benefit to mother | Mother# |
| Straight do good to mother and fetus | Mother# |
| Direct benefit to fetus | Female parent and father# |
| For children | |
| Direct do good to individual subjects | One parent or guardian# |
| No straight benefit to private subjects | Both parents# |
| No direct benefit to the subject or societal (indirect) do good | Both parents# |
| Medical care related to pregnancy | Parental consent is not needed |
| Medical care related to mental health handling, or the diagnosis or treatment of infectious, contagious or communicable diseases | Parental consent is non needed |
| Self-sufficient minors | Parental consent is not needed |
| Anile ≥15 years | |
| Living alone | |
| Managing their own financial diplomacy | |
| Emancipated minors | Parental consent is not needed |
| Married or divorced | |
| On active duty in the US armed forces | |
| By a court | |
| Having the legal right to consent on their ain behalf to medical, dental or mental health treatment |
#: consent requirements are the same whether the take chances is "no more than minimal" or "more than minimal".
Medical students and employees, who take office in numerous aspects of patient care in principal, secondary and tertiary care settings, are often invited to participate in human studies as volunteers. Frequently, the requesting researcher is their supervisor or instructor, who may push them to participate in the study, which can negatively influence their decision and also violate the consent legitimacy. Therefore, in order to protect these subjects confronting "compulsion" or "undue influence", when an investigator wishes to recruit medical students or employees, they must beginning obtain IRB approving for inclusion in the study of these vulnerable subgroups [27].
Prisoners, defined equally any individual involuntarily bars or detained in a penal institution, are considered as "vulnerable" because they may exist coerced into study participation, and also, due to both cognitive and psychiatric disorders, they can show an impaired ability to provide voluntary informed consent [28]. To protect this population, the Office for Human Inquiry Protections has stipulated federal regulations according to which the simply studies that may involve prisoners are those with independent and valid reasons for involving them (tabular array 4) [25].
Table 4
Studies that may involve prisoners
| • Studies on the possible causes, processes and furnishings of incarceration |
| • Studies on prisons equally institutional structures or on prisoners equally incarcerated persons |
| • Studies on special weather affecting prisoners |
| • Studies on practices of improving the health or well-beingness of the prisoners |
| • Epidemiological studies |
Due to the context of war in which they work, also as the critical care setting in which they are treated, military subjects oftentimes receive medical care and/or participate in biomedical research under an "implied consent" condition. Moreover, the superior–subordinate relationship contributes to favour coercion or undue influence, making this population vulnerable [29]. To curb this phenomenon and to ensure that participation is truly voluntary, the United states of america Dept of Defense agencies have adopted requirements similar to those that govern medical research that applies to the noncombatant population. Accordingly, the medical enquiry recruitment session happens in the absence of superiors, and the informed consent is obtained prior to participating in a medical enquiry study. The presence of an ombudsman guarantees and verifies that the participation is voluntary and that the information provided during recruitment is complete, accurate and clear. A payment as an incentive is acceptable but it must not be used to legitimise a coercive interference. Boosted protection is provided to students at service academies, specially those anile <18 years. Yet, when emergency research is conducted or the research study advances the development of a medical production needed by the armed forces, informed consent will not exist required [29].
Psychological vulnerability
Mental disability may compromise the cocky-determination and decision-making capacities [30]. Researchers interested in enrolling individuals with cognitive disorders are invited to apply unlike strategies to promote a better understanding of information-gathering processes. Simplifying the questions and content, adopting supportive technologies, using a more unproblematic language, and spending more time for the information process have been suggested as useful and valid measures. When all these strategies prove to be bereft, the investigators are required to obtain consent from a legally authorised representative [thirty].
Social vulnerability
Similarly to other vulnerable populations, inquiry involving the homeless, ethnic minorities, immigrants and refugees is regulated by laws and specific procedures. Cultural and language differences, "undocumented" migrant status, and the precarious legal positions of these subjects raise several ethical issues, such as whether the participation is truly voluntary, or there are unrealistic expectations, or any benefits for their "status".
Obtaining informed consent in these groups is extremely complex. A friendly process has been identified as the best fashion to adequately involve these vulnerable groups. A health centre or customs building could correspond an attainable location. The reimbursement of travel expenses for applicants can be a valid solution to obtain a representative sample for the clinical enquiry. Clear and simple language, emphasising confidentiality, with the aid of professional interpreters, can tempt migrants to sign the consent course. Lastly, the possibility of receiving something dorsum in return for their contribution may enable successful enrolment of migrants in research [31].
Special needs: children
Because of their young age besides every bit their limited emotional and intellectual abilities, children are considered to be legally incompetent to give valid informed consent; thus, to enrol a kid in a research study, the permission by at least i parent or legal representative is mandatory (table iii). For subjects aged <18 years, biological or adoptive parents or legal guardians (persons having both legal capacity and responsibility) tin can give consent on behalf of their kid, exercising gratis power of choice without whatever form of coercion. While married mothers and fathers both have parental responsibleness, unmarried parents tin can exert parental responsibility merely if they are named individually on the child'due south birth certificate. As well, divorced parents maintain parental responsibility, merely it is necessary to know to whom the child'south custody has been assigned [32]. Nevertheless, on this matter, the European laws and regulations are non harmonised and several discrepancies are present in each country [33].
Despite potential benefits for the research subjects, the failure of parents to requite consent (or their refusal to give consent) is non a rare circumstance [34]. It can be the instance that researchers are dealing with underage parents, and then that, although underage parents are responsible for representing their children, as minors themselves they are not considered to be sufficiently mature; therefore, they will exist not able to give valid consent. Literacy and socioeconomic levels have been identified every bit the most common reasons for parental non-response [34]. Clarity and acceptable explanation of research information materials should be part of effective planning to overcome language and social barriers.
In clinical studies in which the adopted methodology constitutes "less than minimal risks" for children, passive parental consent represents a possible way to more hands obtain informed parental consent [34]. Furthermore, parents can exist informed with regard to a possible written report involving their children, and, at the time of data collection, merely the child's assent is required. In fact, although the child's controlling capacity and understanding of the enquiry project in which he/she will be involved may exist limited, the Medical Research Council have shown that, when report details are provided and communicated in a clear and adequate manner, the kid can be able to reach a decision and participate consciously in the research [35]. "Assent" is the term coined to express the child's willingness to participate in clinical trials despite their young age. The "assent" should include and respect the following key points: 1) helping the child to acquire disease awareness; 2) explaining the potential impact of the experimental treatment; 3) evaluating the child's ability to understand and adapt to new situations or challenges; and iv) positively influencing the patient's willingness to participate in clinical trials [36]. Although the "assent" is not mandatory for research offering a directly do good for the kid, information technology arises from the need to respect paediatric research subjects [37]. The evaluation of the chapters to provide the "assent" is based on developmental stage, intellectual abilities and life or disease experience. Usually, the cutting-off age of seven years is used for the get-go of logical idea processes and rational decision making [38]. However, "assent" for children aged <7 years can be besides required in one case the ability to read and write has been verified [32]. Figures 1 and ii summarise the parental and assent permission requirements, respectively.
Flow chart of parental permission requirements.
Menstruation chart of child assent requirements.
Summary
When conducting clinical research, the obtaining of informed consent is required. Informed consent is a procedure through which a competent discipline, after having received and understood all the research-related information, can voluntarily provide his or her willingness to participate in a clinical trial. However, when information technology is impracticable to obtain consent, and the research does not borrow the principle of self-determination and also provides pregnant clinical relevance, the researcher is legally authorised to proceed without informed consent. Furthermore, in gild to preserve the self-decision and conclusion-making rights, specific law dispositions are applied when vulnerable populations are enrolled in clinical trials.
Footnotes
Conflict of involvement: None declared.
References
ii. International Council for Harmonisation of Technical Requirements for Pharmaceuticals for Human being Utilize (ICH) Integrated addendum to ICH E6(R1): Guideline for Adept Clinical Practice E6(R2). Current Step 4 version. Available from: world wide web.ich.org/products/guidelines/efficacy/article/efficacy-guidelines.html Date final updated: Nov 9, 2016. Date last accessed: March 22, 2018.
five. Gupta UC. Informed consent in clinical research: revisiting few concepts and areas. Perspect Clin Res 2013; 4: 26–32. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
7. Lecouturier J, Rodgers H, Ford GA, et al. . Clinical research without consent in adults in the emergency setting: a review of patient and public views. BMC Med Ethics 2008; 9: 9. [PMC gratis commodity] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
8. Gelinas L, Wertheimer A, Miller FG. When and why is research without consent permissible? Hastings Cent Rep 2016; 46: 35–43. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
ix. Veterans Health Administration VHA Handbook 1004.1. Informed Consent for Clinical Treatments and Procedures. 2009. Available from: world wide web.va.gov/VHAPUBLICATIONS/ViewPublication.asp?pub_ID=2055 Engagement last updated: September twenty, 2017. Date final accessed: March 22, 2018.
eleven. Sim J, Dawson A. Informed consent and cluster-randomized trials. Am J Public Health 2012; 102: 480–485. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
12. Vanlerberghe V, Toledo ME, Rodríguez Chiliad, et al. . Community involvement in dengue vector control: cluster randomised trial. BMJ 2009; 338: b1959. [PMC costless commodity] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
13. Kumar V, Mohanty S, Kumar A, et al. . Effect of community-based behaviour alter management on neonatal bloodshed in Shivgarh, Uttar Pradesh, India: a cluster-randomised controlled trial. Lancet 2008; 372: 1151–1162. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
14. Zelen Grand. Randomized consent designs for clinical trials: an update. Stat Med 1990; 9: 645–656. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
fifteen. Hamajima N, Yuasa H, Nakamura K, et al. . Nested consent design for clinical trials. Jpn J Clin Oncol 1998; 28: 329–332. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
sixteen. Boter H, van Delden JJ, de Haan RJ, et al. . Modified informed consent procedure: consent to postponed data. BMJ 2003; 327: 284–285. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
17. Truog RD, Robinson Due west, Randolph A, et al. . Is informed consent ever necessary for randomized, controlled trials? Due north Engl J Med 1999; 340: 804–807. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
18. Flory J, Karlawish J. The prompted optional randomization trial: a new design for comparative effectiveness enquiry. Am J Public Health 2012; 102: e8–e10. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
19. Flory JH, Mushlin AI, Goodman ZI. Proposals to acquit randomized controlled trials without informed consent: a narrative review. J Gen Intern Med 2016; 31: 1511–1518. [PMC gratuitous commodity] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
20. Aday LA. Who are the vulnerable? In: At Take a chance in America: The Health and Wellness Care Needs of Vulnerable Populations in the The states. 2nd Edn San Francisco, Jossey-Bass, 2001; pp. ane–xv. [Google Scholar]
22. Lupton MG, Williams DJ. The ideals of research on meaning women: is maternal consent sufficient? BJOG 2004; 111: 1307–1312. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
23. Blehar MC, Spong C, Grady C, et al. . Enrolling pregnant women: issues in clinical research. Womens Wellness Problems 2013; 23: e39–e45. [PMC free commodity] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
24. McCullough LB, Coverdale JH, Chervenak FA. A comprehensive upstanding framework for responsibly designing and conducting pharmacologic research that involves pregnant women. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2005; 193: Suppl. 1, 901–907. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
25. Part for Human being Research Protections Code of Federal Regulations. Title 45. Public Welfare. Section of Health and Human Services. Part 46. Protection of Human Subjects. www.hhs.gov/ohrp/regulations-and-policy/regulations/45-cfr-46/index.html Date last updated: January fifteen, 2009. Date last accessed: March 22, 2018.
26. Spencer SA, Dawson A. Implications of informed consent for obstetric research. Obstet Gynaecol 2004; 6: 163–167. [Google Scholar]
27. Ravindran RP, Lester DG, Nawab KA, et al. . The issue of "informed consent" in medical student introductions. Perspect Med Educ 2015; 4: 100–101. [PMC free commodity] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
28. Moser DJ, Arndt Due south, Kanz JE, et al. . Coercion and informed consent in research involving prisoners. Compr Psychiatry 2004; 45: 1–9. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
29. McManus J, Mehta SG, McClinton AR, et al. . Informed consent and upstanding bug in military medical research. Acad Emerg Med 2005; 12: 1120–1126. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
30. Wark S, MacPhail C, McKay K, et al. . Informed consent in a vulnerable population grouping: supporting individuals aging with intellectual disability to participate in developing their own health and support programs. Aust Wellness Rev 2017; 41: 436–442. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
31. van den Muijsenbergh M, Teunissen E, van Weel-Baumgarten E, et al. . Giving voice to the voiceless: how to involve vulnerable migrants in healthcare research. Br J Gen Pract 2016; 66: 284–285. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
32. Cvetkovic Muntañola A. The essentials of the informed consent and assent process in paediatric clinical trials. J Clin Stud 2016; 8: 16–17. [Google Scholar]
33. Lepola P, Needham A, Mendum J, et al. . Informed consent for paediatric clinical trials in Europe. Arch Dis Child 2016; 101: 1017–1025. [PMC gratuitous article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
34. Meaux JB, Bell PL. Balancing recruitment and protection: children as research subjects. Issues Compr Pediatr Nurs 2001; 24: 241–251. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
36. Katz AL, Webb SA, Commission on Bioethics Informed consent in determination-making in pediatric practice. Pediatrics 2016; 138: e20161485. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
37. Simar MR, Johnson VA. Pediatric informed consent: challenges for investigators. Appl Clin Trials 2002; 11: 46–56. [Google Scholar]
38. Informed consent, parental permission, and assent in pediatric practice. Committee on Bioethics. Pediatrics 1995; 95: 314–317. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Source: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5980471/
0 Response to "Which of the Following Is Not Something That Research Reading Requires You to Understand?"
Post a Comment