Advance Research Directives: Dementia Researchers' Views on a Prototype Directive and Implementation Strategies

Q2 Social Sciences Ethics & human research Pub Date : 2021-05-21 DOI:10.1002/eahr.500091
Nola Ries, Elise Mansfield
{"title":"Advance Research Directives: Dementia Researchers' Views on a Prototype Directive and Implementation Strategies","authors":"Nola Ries,&nbsp;Elise Mansfield","doi":"10.1002/eahr.500091","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n <p>Advance research directives (ARDs) enable people to document preferences for future research participation in the event of incapacity. This article reports on interviews with 11 dementia researchers in Australia that focused on the content of a prototype ARD and processes for making and using ARDs. Participants agreed that an ARD template should provide information to explain research and the rationale for making a directive, allow the person to nominate trusted individuals to be involved in future decisions, and record the person's general willingness or unwillingness to be involved in research. Providing a list of various research activities elicits preferences and risk tolerances in more detail. Priority groups for ARD implementation include people with a diagnosis involving progressive cognitive impairment and people interested in research. Researchers and health and legal professionals have a role in promoting ARDs. Our findings suggest that, as a voluntary strategy, ARDs could promote appropriate inclusion in research.</p>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":36829,"journal":{"name":"Ethics & human research","volume":"43 3","pages":"10-25"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-05-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1002/eahr.500091","citationCount":"3","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Ethics & human research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/eahr.500091","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3

Abstract

Advance research directives (ARDs) enable people to document preferences for future research participation in the event of incapacity. This article reports on interviews with 11 dementia researchers in Australia that focused on the content of a prototype ARD and processes for making and using ARDs. Participants agreed that an ARD template should provide information to explain research and the rationale for making a directive, allow the person to nominate trusted individuals to be involved in future decisions, and record the person's general willingness or unwillingness to be involved in research. Providing a list of various research activities elicits preferences and risk tolerances in more detail. Priority groups for ARD implementation include people with a diagnosis involving progressive cognitive impairment and people interested in research. Researchers and health and legal professionals have a role in promoting ARDs. Our findings suggest that, as a voluntary strategy, ARDs could promote appropriate inclusion in research.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
前期研究指令:痴呆研究者对原型指令和实施策略的看法
预先研究指示(ARDs)使人们能够在丧失行为能力的情况下记录未来参与研究的偏好。本文报道了对澳大利亚11位痴呆症研究人员的采访,重点讨论了ARDs原型的内容以及制作和使用ARDs的过程。参与者一致认为,ARD模板应该提供解释研究和制定指令的理由的信息,允许该人提名可信任的个人参与未来的决策,并记录该人是否愿意参与研究。提供各种研究活动的列表可以更详细地引出偏好和风险容忍度。实施ARD的优先群体包括诊断为进行性认知障碍的人和对研究感兴趣的人。研究人员、卫生和法律专业人员在促进ARDs方面发挥着作用。我们的研究结果表明,作为一种自愿策略,ARDs可以促进研究的适当纳入。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Ethics & human research
Ethics & human research Social Sciences-Health (social science)
CiteScore
2.90
自引率
0.00%
发文量
35
期刊最新文献
Issue Information The Prospect of Artificial Intelligence-Supported Ethics Review Ethical Issues Faced by Data Monitoring Committees: Results from an Exploratory Qualitative Study The Ethical Case for Decentralized Clinical Trials The European Health Data Space as a Case Study
×
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
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 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 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1