What parents of children who have received emergency care think about deferring consent in randomised trials of emergency treatments: Postal survey

PLoS ONE

Volumn 7, Issue 5, 2012, Pages

  Gamble, Carrol ^a   Nadel, Simon ^b   Snape, Dee ^a   McKay, Andrew ^a   Hickey, Helen ^a   Williamson, Paula ^a   Glennie, Linda ^c   Snowdon, Claire ^d   Young, Bridget ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF LIVERPOOL   (United Kingdom)

^b IMPERIAL COLLEGE HEALTHCARE NHS TRUST   (United Kingdom)

^c Meningitis Research Foundation   (United Kingdom)

^d LONDON SCHOOL OF HYGIENE AND TROPICAL MEDICINE   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; BACTERIAL MENINGITIS; BEREAVEMENT; CHILD DEATH; CLINICAL STUDY; CONTROLLED STUDY; CRITICALLY ILL PATIENT; EMERGENCY CARE; HUMAN; INTERPERSONAL COMMUNICATION; MENINGOCOCCEMIA; PARENTAL ATTITUDE; PARENTAL CONSENT; POSTAL MAIL; QUESTIONNAIRE; RESEARCH SUBJECT; CHILD; EMERGENCY HEALTH SERVICE; INFORMATION PROCESSING; PARENT; PSYCHOLOGICAL ASPECT; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL (TOPIC);

BACTERIA (MICROORGANISMS);

CHILD; DATA COLLECTION; EMERGENCY MEDICAL SERVICES; HUMANS; PARENTS; QUESTIONNAIRES; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIALS AS TOPIC;

EID: 84860642785     PISSN: None     EISSN: 19326203     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0035982     Document Type: Article

References (19)

1. Stephenson T, (2006) The Medicines for Children Agenda in the UK. Br J Clin Pharmacol 61: 716-719.
2. regulations and administrative provisions of the Member States relating to the implementation of good clinical practice in the conduct of clinical trials on medicinal products for human use. Official Journal of the European Communities L 121, 01/05/2001 P. 0034-0044 DIRECTIVE 2001/20/EC OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT OF THE COUNCIL of 4 April 2001 on the approximation of the laws.
3. Legislation.gov.uk website. Medicines for Human Use (Clinical Trials) Regulations. 10 S.I. 2004/1031 Available: http://www.opsi.gov.uk/si/si2004/20041031. Accessed 2012 Apr.
4. Maitland K, Molyneux S, Boga M, Kiguli S, Lang T, (2011) Use of deferred consent for severely ill children in a multi-centre phase III trial. Trials 12: 90.
5. Legislation.gov.uk website.The Medicines for Human Use (Clinical Trials) Amendment (No. 2) Regulations (2006) 10 Available: http://www.opsi.gov.uk/SI/si2006/20062984.htm. Accessed 2012 Apr.
6. Legislation.gov.uk website.The Medicines for Human Use (Clinical Trials) and Blood Safety and Quality (Amendment) Regulations 2008 941. 10 Available: http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2008/941/pdfs/uksi_20080941_en.pdf. Accessed 2012 Apr.
7. Federal register, (1996) Protection of human subjects; informed consent-FDA. Final rule. 61 (192): 51498-533.
8. Morrison C, Horwitz I, Carrick M, (2009) Ethical and legal issues in emergency research; Barriers to conducting prospective randomized trials in an emergency setting. Journal of Surgical Research 157: 115-122.
9. Jansen T, Kompanje E, Druml C, Menon D, Wiedermann C, et al. (2007) Deferred consent in emergency intensive care research: what if the patient dies early? Use the data or not? Intensive Care Med 33: 894-900.
10. Jansen TC, Bakker J, Kompanje EJ, (2010) Inability to obtain deferred consent due to early death in emergency research: effect on validity of clinical trial results. Intensive Care Med 36 (11): 1962-5.
11. Nichol G, Powell J, van Ottingham L, Maier R, Rea T, et al. (2006) Consent in resuscitation trials: Benefit or harm for patients and society? Resuscitation 70: 360-368.
12. National Collaborating Centre for Women's and Children's Health (2010) Bacterial meningitis and meningococcal septicaemia in children. NICE Clinical Guideline.
13. Braun V, Clarke V, (2006) Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology 3 (2): 77-101.
14. Fereday J, Muir-Cochrane E, (2006) Demonstrating Rigor Using Thematic Analysis: A Hybrid Approach of Inductive and Deductive Coding and Theme Development. International Journal of Qualitative Methods 5 (1).
15. Giacomini M, Ward D, (2000) Users' guides to the medical literature XXIII. Are the results of the study valid? JAMA 284 (3): 357-62.
16. Spencer L, Ritchie J, Lewis J, Dillon L, (2003) Quality in qualitative evaluation: A Framework for Assessing Research Evidence. London Cabinet Office (Government Chief Social Researcher's Office).
17. Culbert A, Davis D, (2005) Parental preferences for neonatal resuscitation research consent: a pilot study. Journal of medical ethics 31: 721-726.
18. Shilling V, Williamson P, Hickey H, Sowden E, Beresford M, et al. (2011) Communication about children's clinical trials as observed and experienced: qualitative study of parents and practitioners. PLoS One 6 (7): e21604.
19. Smyth R, (2011) A risk adapted approach to the governance of clinical trials. BMJ 343, d6756.