Exploring the Decision-Making Process of People Living with HIV Enrolled in Antiretroviral Clinical Trials: A Qualitative Study of Decisions Guided by Trust and Emotions.

IF 1.8 3区 哲学 Q2 ETHICS Health Care Analysis Pub Date : 2023-12-01 Epub Date: 2023-07-21 DOI:10.1007/s10728-023-00461-z
Maria Feijoo-Cid, Antonia Arreciado Marañón, Ariadna Huertas, Amado Rivero-Santana, Carina Cesar, Valeria Fink, María Isabel Fernández-Cano, Omar Sued
{"title":"Exploring the Decision-Making Process of People Living with HIV Enrolled in Antiretroviral Clinical Trials: A Qualitative Study of Decisions Guided by Trust and Emotions.","authors":"Maria Feijoo-Cid, Antonia Arreciado Marañón, Ariadna Huertas, Amado Rivero-Santana, Carina Cesar, Valeria Fink, María Isabel Fernández-Cano, Omar Sued","doi":"10.1007/s10728-023-00461-z","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The informed consent is an ethical and legal requirement for potential participants to enroll in a study. There is ample of evidence that understanding consent information and enrollment is challenging for participants in clinical trials. On the other hand, the reasoning process behind decision-making in HIV clinical trials remains mostly unexplored. This study aims to examine the decision-making process of people living with HIV currently participating in antiretroviral clinical trials and their understanding of informed consent. We conducted a qualitative socio-constructivist study using semi-structured interviews. Eleven participants were selected by purposive sampling in Argentina until data saturation was reached. A content analysis was performed. The findings highlight the fact that some participants decided to enroll on the spot, while others made the decision a few days later. In all cases, the decision was based on different aspects of trust (in doctors, in the clinical research site, in the clinical trials system) but also on emotions associated with HIV and/or treatment. Moreover, while people living with HIV felt truly informed after the consent dialogue with a researcher, consent forms were unintelligible and unfriendly. The immediacy of patient decision-making has rarely been described before. Enrollment in an HIV clinical trial is mainly a trust-based decision but this does not contradict the ethical values of autonomy, voluntariness, non-manipulation, and non-exploitation. Thus, trust is a key issue to be included in reshaping professional practices to ensure the integrity of the informed consent process.</p>","PeriodicalId":46740,"journal":{"name":"Health Care Analysis","volume":" ","pages":"135-155"},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2023-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10693520/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Health Care Analysis","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10728-023-00461-z","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/7/21 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ETHICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The informed consent is an ethical and legal requirement for potential participants to enroll in a study. There is ample of evidence that understanding consent information and enrollment is challenging for participants in clinical trials. On the other hand, the reasoning process behind decision-making in HIV clinical trials remains mostly unexplored. This study aims to examine the decision-making process of people living with HIV currently participating in antiretroviral clinical trials and their understanding of informed consent. We conducted a qualitative socio-constructivist study using semi-structured interviews. Eleven participants were selected by purposive sampling in Argentina until data saturation was reached. A content analysis was performed. The findings highlight the fact that some participants decided to enroll on the spot, while others made the decision a few days later. In all cases, the decision was based on different aspects of trust (in doctors, in the clinical research site, in the clinical trials system) but also on emotions associated with HIV and/or treatment. Moreover, while people living with HIV felt truly informed after the consent dialogue with a researcher, consent forms were unintelligible and unfriendly. The immediacy of patient decision-making has rarely been described before. Enrollment in an HIV clinical trial is mainly a trust-based decision but this does not contradict the ethical values of autonomy, voluntariness, non-manipulation, and non-exploitation. Thus, trust is a key issue to be included in reshaping professional practices to ensure the integrity of the informed consent process.

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
艾滋病毒感染者参与抗逆转录病毒临床试验的决策过程探索:信任和情绪引导下的决策定性研究
知情同意是潜在参与者参加研究的道德和法律要求。有充分的证据表明,理解同意信息和登记对临床试验的参与者来说是具有挑战性的。另一方面,艾滋病毒临床试验决策背后的推理过程大部分仍未被探索。本研究旨在调查目前参与抗逆转录病毒临床试验的艾滋病毒感染者的决策过程及其对知情同意的理解。我们使用半结构化访谈进行了定性的社会建构主义研究。在阿根廷通过有目的的抽样选择了11名参与者,直到达到数据饱和。进行了内容分析。研究结果强调了这样一个事实:一些参与者当场决定报名,而另一些人则在几天后做出决定。在所有情况下,决定都是基于不同方面的信任(对医生、对临床研究地点、对临床试验系统),但也基于与艾滋病毒和/或治疗相关的情绪。此外,虽然艾滋病毒感染者在与研究人员进行同意对话后感到真正了解情况,但同意书是难以理解和不友好的。病人决策的即时性以前很少被描述过。参加艾滋病毒临床试验主要是基于信任的决定,但这并不违背自主、自愿、非操纵和非剥削的伦理价值观。因此,信任是重塑专业实践以确保知情同意过程完整性的关键问题。
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
CiteScore
4.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
3
期刊介绍: Health Care Analysis is a journal that promotes dialogue and debate about conceptual and normative issues related to health and health care, including health systems, healthcare provision, health law, public policy and health, professional health practice, health services organization and decision-making, and health-related education at all levels of clinical medicine, public health and global health. Health Care Analysis seeks to support the conversation between philosophy and policy, in particular illustrating the importance of conceptual and normative analysis to health policy, practice and research. As such, papers accepted for publication are likely to analyse philosophical questions related to health, health care or health policy that focus on one or more of the following: aims or ends, theories, frameworks, concepts, principles, values or ideology. All styles of theoretical analysis are welcome providing that they illuminate conceptual or normative issues and encourage debate between those interested in health, philosophy and policy. Papers must be rigorous, but should strive for accessibility – with care being taken to ensure that their arguments and implications are plain to a broad academic and international audience. In addition to purely theoretical papers, papers grounded in empirical research or case-studies are very welcome so long as they explore the conceptual or normative implications of such work. Authors are encouraged, where possible, to have regard to the social contexts of the issues they are discussing, and all authors should ensure that they indicate the ‘real world’ implications of their work. Health Care Analysis publishes contributions from philosophers, lawyers, social scientists, healthcare educators, healthcare professionals and administrators, and other health-related academics and policy analysts.
期刊最新文献
Sustainability as an Intrinsic Moral Concern for Solidaristic Health Care. Recontextualization and Imagination: The Public Health Professional and the U.S. Health Care System. Childbirth as Fault Lines: Justifications in Physician-Patient Interactions About Postnatal Rehabilitation. Ethical, Psychological and Social Un/certainties in the Face of Deemed Consent for Organ Donation in England. "I Do Not Believe We Should Disclose Everything to an Older Patient": Challenges and Ethical Concerns in Clinical Decision-Making in Old-Age Care in Ethiopia.
×
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