术中神经科学研究中的伦理问题:评估受试者对知情同意的回忆和参与动机。

Q1 Arts and Humanities
Anna Wexler, Rebekah J Choi, Ashwin G Ramayya, Nikhil Sharma, Brendan J McShane, Love Y Buch, Melanie P Donley-Fletcher, Joshua I Gold, Gordon H Baltuch, Sara Goering, Eran Klein
{"title":"术中神经科学研究中的伦理问题:评估受试者对知情同意的回忆和参与动机。","authors":"Anna Wexler,&nbsp;Rebekah J Choi,&nbsp;Ashwin G Ramayya,&nbsp;Nikhil Sharma,&nbsp;Brendan J McShane,&nbsp;Love Y Buch,&nbsp;Melanie P Donley-Fletcher,&nbsp;Joshua I Gold,&nbsp;Gordon H Baltuch,&nbsp;Sara Goering,&nbsp;Eran Klein","doi":"10.1080/23294515.2021.1941415","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p><b>Background</b>An increasing number of studies utilize intracranial electrophysiology in human subjects to advance basic neuroscience knowledge. However, the use of neurosurgical patients as human research subjects raises important ethical considerations, particularly regarding informed consent and undue influence, as well as subjects' motivations for participation. Yet a thorough empirical examination of these issues in a participant population has been lacking. The present study therefore aimed to empirically investigate ethical concerns regarding informed consent and voluntariness in Parkinson's disease patients undergoing deep brain stimulator (DBS) placement who participated in an intraoperative neuroscience study.<b>Methods</b>Two semi-structured 30-minute interviews were conducted preoperatively and postoperatively via telephone. Interviews assessed participants' motivations for participation in the parent intraoperative study, recall of information presented during the informed consent process, and participants' postoperative reflections on the research study.<b>Results</b>Twenty-two participants (mean age = 60.9) completed preoperative interviews at a mean of 7.8 days following informed consent and a mean of 5.2 days prior to DBS surgery. Twenty participants completed postoperative interviews at a mean of 5 weeks following surgery. All participants cited altruism or advancing medical science as \"very important\" or \"important\" in their decision to participate in the study. Only 22.7% (<i>n</i> = 5) correctly recalled one of the two risks of the study. Correct recall of other aspects of the informed consent was poor (36.4% for study purpose; 50.0% for study protocol; 36.4% for study benefits). All correctly understood that the study would not confer a direct therapeutic benefit to them.<b>Conclusion</b>Even though research coordinators were properly trained and the informed consent was administered according to protocol, participants demonstrated poor retention of study information. While intraoperative studies that aim to advance neuroscience knowledge represent a unique opportunity to gain fundamental scientific knowledge, improved standards for the informed consent process can help facilitate their ethical implementation.</p>","PeriodicalId":38118,"journal":{"name":"AJOB Empirical Bioethics","volume":"13 1","pages":"57-66"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/23294515.2021.1941415","citationCount":"10","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Ethical Issues in Intraoperative Neuroscience Research: Assessing Subjects' Recall of Informed Consent and Motivations for Participation.\",\"authors\":\"Anna Wexler,&nbsp;Rebekah J Choi,&nbsp;Ashwin G Ramayya,&nbsp;Nikhil Sharma,&nbsp;Brendan J McShane,&nbsp;Love Y Buch,&nbsp;Melanie P Donley-Fletcher,&nbsp;Joshua I Gold,&nbsp;Gordon H Baltuch,&nbsp;Sara Goering,&nbsp;Eran Klein\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/23294515.2021.1941415\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p><b>Background</b>An increasing number of studies utilize intracranial electrophysiology in human subjects to advance basic neuroscience knowledge. However, the use of neurosurgical patients as human research subjects raises important ethical considerations, particularly regarding informed consent and undue influence, as well as subjects' motivations for participation. Yet a thorough empirical examination of these issues in a participant population has been lacking. The present study therefore aimed to empirically investigate ethical concerns regarding informed consent and voluntariness in Parkinson's disease patients undergoing deep brain stimulator (DBS) placement who participated in an intraoperative neuroscience study.<b>Methods</b>Two semi-structured 30-minute interviews were conducted preoperatively and postoperatively via telephone. Interviews assessed participants' motivations for participation in the parent intraoperative study, recall of information presented during the informed consent process, and participants' postoperative reflections on the research study.<b>Results</b>Twenty-two participants (mean age = 60.9) completed preoperative interviews at a mean of 7.8 days following informed consent and a mean of 5.2 days prior to DBS surgery. Twenty participants completed postoperative interviews at a mean of 5 weeks following surgery. All participants cited altruism or advancing medical science as \\\"very important\\\" or \\\"important\\\" in their decision to participate in the study. Only 22.7% (<i>n</i> = 5) correctly recalled one of the two risks of the study. Correct recall of other aspects of the informed consent was poor (36.4% for study purpose; 50.0% for study protocol; 36.4% for study benefits). All correctly understood that the study would not confer a direct therapeutic benefit to them.<b>Conclusion</b>Even though research coordinators were properly trained and the informed consent was administered according to protocol, participants demonstrated poor retention of study information. While intraoperative studies that aim to advance neuroscience knowledge represent a unique opportunity to gain fundamental scientific knowledge, improved standards for the informed consent process can help facilitate their ethical implementation.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":38118,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"AJOB Empirical Bioethics\",\"volume\":\"13 1\",\"pages\":\"57-66\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/23294515.2021.1941415\",\"citationCount\":\"10\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"AJOB Empirical Bioethics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/23294515.2021.1941415\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"Arts and Humanities\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"AJOB Empirical Bioethics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/23294515.2021.1941415","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Arts and Humanities","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 10

摘要

越来越多的研究利用人类受试者的颅内电生理学来推进基础神经科学知识。然而,使用神经外科病人作为人类研究对象引起了重要的伦理考虑,特别是关于知情同意和不当影响,以及受试者参与的动机。然而,在参与者群体中对这些问题进行彻底的实证研究一直缺乏。因此,本研究旨在实证调查参与术中神经科学研究的帕金森病患者在接受深部脑刺激器(DBS)植入时关于知情同意和自愿的伦理问题。方法术前、术后两次半结构化电话访谈,各30分钟。访谈评估了参与者参与父母术中研究的动机,在知情同意过程中提供的信息的回忆,以及参与者术后对研究的反思。结果22名参与者(平均年龄60.9岁)在知情同意后平均7.8天、DBS手术前平均5.2天完成术前访谈。20名参与者在术后平均5周完成术后访谈。所有参与者在决定参加这项研究时,都认为利他主义或推进医学科学“非常重要”或“重要”。只有22.7% (n = 5)的人正确回忆起研究中两种风险中的一种。对知情同意其他方面的正确回忆较差(研究目的为36.4%;50.0%为研究方案;36.4%的人认为研究有益)。所有人都正确地认识到,这项研究不会给他们带来直接的治疗益处。结论:尽管研究协调员接受了适当的培训,知情同意也按照协议执行,但参与者对研究信息的保留程度较差。虽然旨在推进神经科学知识的术中研究代表了获得基础科学知识的独特机会,但知情同意过程的改进标准有助于促进其伦理实施。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

Ethical Issues in Intraoperative Neuroscience Research: Assessing Subjects' Recall of Informed Consent and Motivations for Participation.

Ethical Issues in Intraoperative Neuroscience Research: Assessing Subjects' Recall of Informed Consent and Motivations for Participation.

BackgroundAn increasing number of studies utilize intracranial electrophysiology in human subjects to advance basic neuroscience knowledge. However, the use of neurosurgical patients as human research subjects raises important ethical considerations, particularly regarding informed consent and undue influence, as well as subjects' motivations for participation. Yet a thorough empirical examination of these issues in a participant population has been lacking. The present study therefore aimed to empirically investigate ethical concerns regarding informed consent and voluntariness in Parkinson's disease patients undergoing deep brain stimulator (DBS) placement who participated in an intraoperative neuroscience study.MethodsTwo semi-structured 30-minute interviews were conducted preoperatively and postoperatively via telephone. Interviews assessed participants' motivations for participation in the parent intraoperative study, recall of information presented during the informed consent process, and participants' postoperative reflections on the research study.ResultsTwenty-two participants (mean age = 60.9) completed preoperative interviews at a mean of 7.8 days following informed consent and a mean of 5.2 days prior to DBS surgery. Twenty participants completed postoperative interviews at a mean of 5 weeks following surgery. All participants cited altruism or advancing medical science as "very important" or "important" in their decision to participate in the study. Only 22.7% (n = 5) correctly recalled one of the two risks of the study. Correct recall of other aspects of the informed consent was poor (36.4% for study purpose; 50.0% for study protocol; 36.4% for study benefits). All correctly understood that the study would not confer a direct therapeutic benefit to them.ConclusionEven though research coordinators were properly trained and the informed consent was administered according to protocol, participants demonstrated poor retention of study information. While intraoperative studies that aim to advance neuroscience knowledge represent a unique opportunity to gain fundamental scientific knowledge, improved standards for the informed consent process can help facilitate their ethical implementation.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
AJOB Empirical Bioethics
AJOB Empirical Bioethics Arts and Humanities-Philosophy
CiteScore
3.90
自引率
0.00%
发文量
21
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信