收获可公开获得的临床试验同意书的恩惠。

IRB Pub Date : 2017-11-01
Holly Fernandez Lynch, Emily A Largent, Deborah A Zarin
{"title":"收获可公开获得的临床试验同意书的恩惠。","authors":"Holly Fernandez Lynch,&nbsp;Emily A Largent,&nbsp;Deborah A Zarin","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Public access to clinical trial consent forms, beyond those individuals involved in reviewing, conducting, or participating in a trial, has been notoriously poor, resulting in missed opportunities for empirical analysis and improvement, among other benefits. However, recent changes to the Common Rule and policies governing ClinicalTrials.gov promise to make trial consent forms more accessible to the public, including prospective trial participants, other trialists and IRBs, and those seeking to study research consent. Analysis of publicly available consent forms can facilitate development of best practices, make the process of drafting consent forms more efficient, and provide insight into how well consent forms are satisfying their mission of protecting and promoting the autonomy of trial participants. Gaps in public access will remain even under the new policies, but we are on the cusp of an exciting new dataset that can contribute to addressing a perpetual challenge in research ethics: optimal informed consent.</p>","PeriodicalId":73513,"journal":{"name":"IRB","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2017-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5985974/pdf/nihms911117.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Reaping the Bounty of Publicly Available Clinical Trial Consent Forms.\",\"authors\":\"Holly Fernandez Lynch,&nbsp;Emily A Largent,&nbsp;Deborah A Zarin\",\"doi\":\"\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Public access to clinical trial consent forms, beyond those individuals involved in reviewing, conducting, or participating in a trial, has been notoriously poor, resulting in missed opportunities for empirical analysis and improvement, among other benefits. However, recent changes to the Common Rule and policies governing ClinicalTrials.gov promise to make trial consent forms more accessible to the public, including prospective trial participants, other trialists and IRBs, and those seeking to study research consent. Analysis of publicly available consent forms can facilitate development of best practices, make the process of drafting consent forms more efficient, and provide insight into how well consent forms are satisfying their mission of protecting and promoting the autonomy of trial participants. Gaps in public access will remain even under the new policies, but we are on the cusp of an exciting new dataset that can contribute to addressing a perpetual challenge in research ethics: optimal informed consent.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":73513,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"IRB\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2017-11-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5985974/pdf/nihms911117.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"IRB\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"IRB","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

除了那些参与审查、实施或参与试验的个人之外,公众对临床试验同意表的获取一直是出了名的差,导致错过了经验分析和改进的机会,以及其他好处。然而,最近对管理ClinicalTrials.gov的共同规则和政策的修改承诺使试验同意书更容易向公众开放,包括潜在的试验参与者、其他试验人员和内部审查委员会,以及那些寻求研究同意书的人。对可公开获得的同意书进行分析,可以促进最佳做法的发展,提高同意书起草过程的效率,并深入了解同意书在多大程度上履行了保护和促进试验参与者自主权的使命。即使在新政策下,公众获取的差距仍将存在,但我们正处于一个令人兴奋的新数据集的尖端,它可以有助于解决研究伦理中一个永恒的挑战:最佳知情同意。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Reaping the Bounty of Publicly Available Clinical Trial Consent Forms.

Public access to clinical trial consent forms, beyond those individuals involved in reviewing, conducting, or participating in a trial, has been notoriously poor, resulting in missed opportunities for empirical analysis and improvement, among other benefits. However, recent changes to the Common Rule and policies governing ClinicalTrials.gov promise to make trial consent forms more accessible to the public, including prospective trial participants, other trialists and IRBs, and those seeking to study research consent. Analysis of publicly available consent forms can facilitate development of best practices, make the process of drafting consent forms more efficient, and provide insight into how well consent forms are satisfying their mission of protecting and promoting the autonomy of trial participants. Gaps in public access will remain even under the new policies, but we are on the cusp of an exciting new dataset that can contribute to addressing a perpetual challenge in research ethics: optimal informed consent.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
IRB
IRB
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
The wages of sin. Promoting Research with Organ Transplant Patients. Advance Directive for Research: How Do They Compare with Surrogates' Predictions of Older Adults' Preferences? Therapeutic Misperceptions in Early-Phase Cancer Trials: From Categorical to Continuous. Potential Benefits to Families, Children, and Adolescents Enrolled in Longitudinal Qualitative Research.
×
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