Misdirections in informed consent — Impediments to health care innovation

New England Journal of Medicine

Volumn 377, Issue 15, 2017, Pages 1412-1414

  Asch, David A ^a   Ziolek, Tracy A ^a   Mehta, Shivan J ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

CANCER SCREENING; COLONOSCOPY; COLORECTAL CANCER; HUMAN; INFORMED CONSENT; MEDICAL ETHICS; MOTIVATION; PATIENT ATTITUDE; PATIENT RIGHT; PATIENT SAFETY; PRACTICE GUIDELINE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; SHORT SURVEY; ETHICS; GOVERNMENT REGULATION; LEGISLATION AND JURISPRUDENCE; PROFESSIONAL STANDARD; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL (TOPIC); TOTAL QUALITY MANAGEMENT; UNITED STATES;

ETHICS COMMITTEES, RESEARCH; GOVERNMENT REGULATION; HUMANS; INFORMED CONSENT; QUALITY IMPROVEMENT; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIALS AS TOPIC; UNITED STATES;

EID: 85030984749     PISSN: 00284793     EISSN: 15334406     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1056/NEJMp1707991     Document Type: Short Survey

References (5)

1. Gelinas L, Wertheimer A, Miller FG. When and why is research without consent permissible? Hastings Cent Rep 2016;46(2):35-43.
2. Prasad Kerlin M, Small DS, Cooney E, et al. A randomized trial of nighttime physician staffing in an intensive care unit. N Engl J Med 2013;368:2201-9.
3. Baily MA, Bottrell M, Lynn J, Jennings B. The ethics of using QI methods to improve health care quality and safety. Hastings Cent Rep 2006;36(4):S1-S40.
4. Aysola J, Tahirovic E, Troxel AB, et al. A randomized controlled trial of opt-in versus opt-out enrollment into a diabetes behavioral intervention. Am J Health Pro-mot 2016 October 21 (Epub ahead of print).
5. Mehta SJ, Troxel AB, Marcus N, et al. Participation rates with opt-out enrollment in a remote monitoring intervention for patients with myocardial infarction. JAMA Cardiol 2016;1:847-8.