Subjects agree to participate in environmental health studies without fully comprehending the associated risk

International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health

Volumn 8, Issue 3, 2011, Pages 830-841

  Lee, Robin ^a   Lampert, Samantha ^a   Wilder, Lynn ^a   Sowell, Anne L ^a  

^a AGENCY FOR TOXIC SUBSTANCES AND DISEASE REGISTRY   (United States)

Author keywords

Bioethics; Comprehension; Consent forms; Environmental health; Ethics; Informed consent; Research subjects

Indexed keywords

ADULT; AGE; AGED; CONTROLLED STUDY; ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH; FEMALE; GENDER; HUMAN; INFORMED CONSENT; MALE; MASS SCREENING; PUBLIC HEALTH; RACE; READING; RECALL; RECOGNITION; RESEARCH ETHICS; RESEARCH SUBJECT; REVIEW; RISK ASSESSMENT;

EID: 79953293035     PISSN: None     EISSN: 16604601     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3390/ijerph8030830     Document Type: Review

References (40)

1. National Research Council. Human Biomonitoring for Environmental Chemicals; National Academies Press: Washington, DC, USA, 2006; pp. 17-21.
2. Brody, J.G.; Morello-Frosch, R.; Brown, P.; Rudel, R.A.; Altman, R.G.; Frye, M.; Osimo, C.A.; Perez, C.; Seryak, L.M. Improving disclosure and consent: "is it safe?": New ethics for reporting personal exposures to environmental chemicals. Amer. J. Public Health 2007, 97, 1547-1554.
3. Silver, K.; Sharp, R.R. Ethical considerations in testing workers for the-Glu69 marker of genetic susceptibility to chronic beryllium disease. J. Occup. Environ. Med. 2006, 48, 434-443.
4. Harrison, M. Applying bioethical principles to human biomonitoring. Environ. Health 2008, 7 (Suppl 1), S1-S8.
5. The Belmont Report: Ethical Principles and Guidelines for the Protection of Human Subjects in Research; Government Printing Office: Washington, DC, USA, 1978; p. 3 v.
6. Griffin, J.M.; Struve, J.K.; Collins, D.; Liu, A.; Nelson, D.B.; Bloomfield, H.E. Long term clinical trials: How much information do participants retain from the informed consent process? Contemp. Clin. Trials 2006, 27, 441-448.
7. White, C.S.; Mason, A.C.; Feehan, M.; Templeton, P.A. Informed consent for percutaneous lung biopsy: Comparison of two consent protocols based on patient recall after the procedure. Amer. J. Roentgenol. 1995, 165, 1139-1142.
8. Benson, P.R.; Roth, L.H.; Appelbaum, P.S.; Lidz, C.W.; Winslade, W.J. Information disclosure, subject understanding, and informed consent in psychiatric research. Law Hum. Behav. 1988, 12, 455-475.
9. Combs, D.R.; Adams, S.D.; Wood, T.D.; Basso, M.R.; Gouvier, W.D. Informed consent in schizophrenia: The use of cues in the assessment of understanding. Schizophr. Res. 2005, 77, 59-63.
10. Ryan, R.E.; Prictor, M.J.; McLaughlin, K.J.; Hill, S.J. Audio-visual presentation of information for informed consent for participation in clinical trials. Cochrane Database Syst. Rev. 2008, 1, Art. No. CD003717, DOI: 10.1002/14651858. CD003717. pub2.
11. Ford, M.E.; Kallen, M.; Richardson, P.; Matthiesen, E.; Cox, V.; Teng, E.J.; Cook, K.F.; Petersen, N.J. Effect of social support on informed consent in older adults with Parkinson disease and their caregivers. J. Med. Ethics 2008, 34, 41-47.
12. McCrady, B.S.; Bux, D.A., Jr. Ethical issues in informed consent with substance abusers. J. Consult. Clin. Psychol. 1999, 67, 186-193.
13. Appelbaum, P.S. Consent in impaired populations. Curr. Neurol. Neurosci. Rep. 2010, 10, 367-373.
14. Subpart A-Basic Health and Human Services Policy for Protection of Human Subjects. In Code of Federal Regulations. Title 45 Public Welfare; U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS): Washington, DC, USA, 2005; § 46-101-46.
15. Kincaid, J.; Fishburne, R.; Rogers, R.; Chissom, B. Derivation of New Readability Formulas (Automated Readability Index, Fog Count, and Flesch Reading Ease Formula) for Navy Enlisted Personnel; Research Branch Report 8-75; Naval Air Station: Memphis, TN, USA, 1975.
16. Faden, R.R.; Beauchamp, T.L. Decision-making and informed consent: A study of the impact of disclosed information. Soc. Indic. Res. 1980, 7, 313-336.
17. McGuire, W. Attitude change: The information-processing paradigm. In Experimental Social Psychology; McClintock, C.G., Ed.; Holt, Rinehart & Winston: New York, NY, USA, 1972.
18. Franck, L.S.; Winter, I.; Oulton, K. The quality of parental consent for research with children: A prospective repeated measure self-report survey. Int. J. Nurs. Stud. 2007, 44, 525-533.
19. Henry, J.; Palmer, B.W.; Palinkas, L.; Glorioso, D.K.; Caligiuri, M.P.; Jeste, D.V. Reformed consent: Adapting to new media and research participant preferences. IRB 2009, 31, 1-8.
20. Agre, P.; Rapkin, B. Improving informed consent: A comparison of four consent tools. IRB 2003, 25, 1-7.
21. Carver, R.P. Reading Rate: A Review of Research and Theory; Academic Press: San Diego, CA, USA, 1990.
22. Jefford, M.; Moore, R. Improvement of informed consent and the quality of consent documents. Lancet Oncol. 2008, 9, 485-493.
23. Taub, H.A.; Baker, M.T.; Sturr, J.F. Informed consent for research. Effects of readability, patient age, and education. J. Amer. Geriat. Soc. 1986, 34, 601-606.
24. Taub, H.A. Informed consent, memory and age. Gerontologist 1980, 20, 686-690.
25. Coyne, C.A.; Xu, R.; Raich, P.; Plomer, K.; Dignan, M.; Wenzel, L.B.; Fairclough, D.; Habermann, T.; Schnell, L.; Quella, S.; Cella, D. Randomized, controlled trial of an easy-to-read informed consent statement for clinical trial participation: A study of the Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group. J. Clin. Oncol. 2003, 21, 836-842.
26. Schwartz, V.; Appelbaum, P.S. Improving the quality of informed consent to research. IRB 2008, 30, 19-20.
27. Llewellyn-Thomas, H.A.; Thiel, E.C.; Sem, F.W.; Woermke, D.E. Presenting clinical trial information: A comparison of methods. Patient Educ. Couns. 1995, 25, 97-107.
28. Dunn, L.B.; Lindamer, L.A.; Palmer, B.W.; Golshan, S.; Schneiderman, L.J.; Jeste, D.V. Improving understanding of research consent in middle-aged and elderly patients with psychotic disorders. Amer. J. Geriatr. Psychiatr. 2002, 10, 142-150.
29. Agre, P.; Campbell, F.A.; Goldman, B.D.; Boccia, M.L.; Kass, N.; McCullough, L.B.; Merz, J.F.; Miller, S.M.; Mintz, J.; Rapkin, B.; Sugarman, J.; Sorenson, J.; Wirshing, D. Improving informed consent: The medium is not the message. IRB 2003, Suppl 25, S11-S19.
30. Flory, J.; Emanuel, E. Interventions to improve research participants' understanding in informed consent for research: A systematic review. J. Am. Med. Assoc. 2004, 292, 1593-1601.
31. Holmes-Rovner, M.; Wills, C.E. Improving informed consent: Insights from behavioral decision research. Med. Care 2002, 40, V30-V38.
32. de Melo-Martin, I.; Ho, A. Beyond informed consent: The therapeutic misconception and trust. J. Med. Ethics 2008, 34, 202-205.
33. Lidz, C.W.; Appelbaum, P.S. The therapeutic misconception: Problems and solutions. Med. Care 2002, 40, V55-V63.
34. Byrne, D.J.; Napier, A.; Cuschieri, A. How informed is signed consent? Br. Med. J. 1988, 296, 839-840.
35. Hill, Z.; Tawiah-Agyemang, C.; Odei-Danso, S.; Kirkwood, B. Informed consent in Ghana: What do participants really understand? J. Med. Ethics 2008, 34, 48-53.
36. Singh, A.; Scheer, I.; Thakar, R.; Sultan, A.H. Trials and tribulations of the current national consent form. J. Obstet. Gynaecol. 2007, 27, 475-478.
37. Holloman, E.L.; Newman, M.C. A community-based assessment of seafood consumption along the lower James River, Virginia, USA: Potential sources of dietary mercury exposure. Environ. Res. 2010, 110, 213-219.
38. Israel, B.A.; Schulz, A.J.; Parker, E.A.; Becker, A.B. Review of community-based research: Assessing partnership approaches to improve public health. Annu. Rev. Public Health 1998, 19, 173-202.
39. Van Olphen, J.; Ottoson, J.; Green, L.; Barlow, J.; Koblick, K.; Hiatt, R. Evaluation of a partnership approach to translating research on breast cancer and the environment. Prog. Community Health Partnersh. 2009, 3, 213-226.
40. White, M.C.; Berger-Frank, S.; Campagna, D.; Inserra, S.G.; Middleton, D.; Millette, M.D.; Noonan, C.W.; Peipins, L.A.; Williamson, D. Communicating results to community residents: Lessons from recent ATSDR health investigations. J. Expo. Anal. Environ. Epidemiol. 2004, 14, 484-491.