Kim Scott Y H, Kim Hyungjin Myra, McCallum Colleen, Tariot Pierre N
Department of Psychiatry, Center for Behavioral and Decision Sciences in Medicine, University of Michigan Medical School, Ann Arbor, MI, USA.
Neurology. 2005 Nov 8;65(9):1395-401. doi: 10.1212/01.wnl.0000183144.61428.73.
Research involving decisionally incapable adults remains an unsettled and controversial policy issue, especially for protocols that involve significant risk to participants. Few data exist to guide policymakers and IRBs
Survey the views of persons at heightened risk for dementia regarding the acceptability of surrogate consent for biomedical research of varying levels of risks and potential benefits.
Using a mail survey, the authors surveyed the participants at one of the sites of the Alzheimer's Disease Anti-inflammatory Prevention Trial (all participants are 70 years old or older with at least one first-degree relative with dementia) and measured responses regarding the acceptability of surrogate consent for 10 research scenarios of varying degrees of risks and benefits (ranging from an observation study to a gene transfer protocol), given from the perspectives of social policy, personal preferences for self, and preferences when deciding on behalf of a loved one.
Two hundred twenty-nine of 259 eligible participants responded (88%). A large majority (>90%) found minimal risk studies as well as randomized clinical trials of new medications acceptable for surrogate consent. A smaller majority found the more invasive studies acceptable. Participants were more cautious when deciding for a loved one. General attitude toward biomedical research and scenario-specific risk perception were strong independent predictors. Demographic and personal history variables had relatively little effect.
Laypersons at heightened risk of Alzheimer disease discriminate among research scenarios of varying risks and burdens. They are supportive of surrogate consent-based research even when the risks and burdens are significant to the subjects; these opinions appear to be based in part on their assessment of risks as well as on their general attitude toward biomedical research.
涉及无决策能力成年人的研究仍是一个尚未解决且存在争议的政策问题,尤其是对于那些给参与者带来重大风险的方案。几乎没有数据可用于指导政策制定者和机构审查委员会。
调查患痴呆症风险较高的人群对于不同风险和潜在益处水平的生物医学研究中替代同意的可接受性的看法。
作者通过邮件调查,对阿尔茨海默病抗炎预防试验其中一个地点的参与者进行了调查(所有参与者年龄在70岁及以上,至少有一位患有痴呆症的一级亲属),并测量了他们对于10种不同风险和益处程度的研究方案(从观察性研究到基因转移方案)替代同意可接受性的反应,这些反应是从社会政策、个人对自身的偏好以及代表亲人做决定时的偏好等角度给出的。
259名符合条件的参与者中有229人回复(88%)。绝大多数(>90%)认为最低风险研究以及新药的随机临床试验可接受替代同意。较小多数认为侵入性更强的研究可接受。参与者在为亲人做决定时更为谨慎。对生物医学研究的总体态度和特定方案的风险认知是强有力的独立预测因素。人口统计学和个人病史变量的影响相对较小。
患阿尔茨海默病风险较高的外行人会区分不同风险和负担的研究方案。他们支持基于替代同意开展的研究,即使风险和负担对受试者来说很大;这些观点似乎部分基于他们对风险的评估以及对生物医学研究的总体态度。