Attitudes of the general public toward alternative consent models

American Journal of Critical Care

Volumn 20, Issue 1, 2011, Pages 75-83

  Burns, Karen E A ^a,b   Magyarody, Nora M ^c   Duffett, Mark ^d   Nisenbaum, Rosane ^a,b   Cook, Deborah J ^e  

^a UNIVERSITY OF TORONTO   (Canada)

^b ST MICHAEL'S HOSPITAL   (Canada)

^c UNIVERSITY OF WESTERN ONTARIO   (Canada)

^d MCMASTER CHILDREN S HOSPITAL   (Canada)

^e MCMASTER UNIVERSITY   (Canada)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ADOLESCENT; ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; FEMALE; HUMAN; INFORMATION PROCESSING; INFORMED CONSENT; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; PUBLIC OPINION; THEORETICAL MODEL;

ADOLESCENT; ADULT; AGED; AGED, 80 AND OVER; DATA COLLECTION; FEMALE; HUMANS; INFORMED CONSENT; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; MODELS, THEORETICAL; PUBLIC OPINION; YOUNG ADULT;

EID: 78751516216     PISSN: 10623264     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.4037/ajcc2010645     Document Type: Article

References (15)

1. Health Care Consent Act, 1996. Chapter 2, Schedule A. http://www.e-laws.gov.on.ca/html/statutes/english/elaws_statutes_96h02_e.htm#BK25. Accessed February 11, 2010.
2. Coppolino M, Ackerson L. Do surrogate decision makers provide accurate consent for intensive care research? Chest. 2001;119:603-612.
3. Azoulay E, Chevret S, Leleu G, et al. Half the families of intensive care patients experience inadequate communication with physicians. Intensive Care Med. 2000;28:3044-3049.
4. Shalowitz DI, Garrett-Mayer E, Wendler D. The accuracy of surrogate decision makers. Arch Intern Med. 2006;166:493-497.
5. Ciroldi M, Cariou A, Adrie C, et al. Ability of family members to predict patient's consent to critical care research. Intensive Care Med. 2007;33(5):807-813. Epub 2007 Mar 15.
6. Tri-Council Policy Statement. Ethical Conduct for Research Involving Humans. Medical Research Council of Canada, Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada, Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada; June 2003. http://pre.ethics.gc.ca/eng/policy-poli-tique/tcps-eptc/.
7. Marshall JC, Cook DJ, for the Canadian Critical Care Trials Group. Barriers to investigator-initiated ICU research: a survey of the Canadian Critical Care Trials Group [abstract]. Crit Care Med. 2005;33(12):suppl.M113A.
8. Mitka M. Aiding emergency research aim of report on exemptions to informed consent. JAMA. 2007;298:2608-2609.
9. Burns KE, Duffett M, Kho ME, et al. ACCADEMY group: a guide for the design and conduct of self-administered surveys of clinicians. CMAJ. 2008;179(3):245-252.
10. Landis JR, Cock GG. The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics. 1977;33:159-174.
11. Morley CJ, Lau R, Davis PG, Morse C. What do parents think about enrolling their premature babies in several research studies? Arch Dis Child Fetal Neonatal Ed. 2005; 90:F225-228.
12. Azoulay E, Pochard F, Kentish-Barnes N, et al. Risk of post-traumatic stress symptoms in family members of intensive care unit patients. Intensive Care Med. 2005;171:987-994.
13. Annane D, Outin H, Fisch C, Bellissant E. The effect of waiving consent on enrollment in a sepsis trial. Intensive Care Med. 2004;30:321-324.
14. Harvey SE, Elbourne D, Ashcroft J, et al. Informed consent in clinical trials in critical care: experience from the PAC-Man Study. Intensive Care Med. 2006:32:2020-2025.
15. Cook D, Moore-Cox A, Xavier D, Lauzier F, Roberts I. Randomized trials in vulnerable patient populations. Clin Trials. 2008;5(1):61-69.