• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

将痴呆症患者纳入研究:对澳大利亚伦理和法律规则及改革建议的分析

Including People with Dementia in Research: An Analysis of Australian Ethical and Legal Rules and Recommendations for Reform.

作者信息

Ries Nola M, Thompson Katie A, Lowe Michael

机构信息

Faculty of Law, University of Technology Sydney, Broadway, NSW, 2007, Australia.

School of Law, University of Newcastle, Callaghan, NSW, 2308, Australia.

出版信息

J Bioeth Inq. 2017 Sep;14(3):359-374. doi: 10.1007/s11673-017-9794-9. Epub 2017 Jun 20.

DOI:10.1007/s11673-017-9794-9
PMID:28634767
Abstract

Research is crucial to advancing knowledge about dementia, yet the burden of the disease currently outpaces research activity. Research often excludes people with dementia and other cognitive impairments because researchers and ethics committees are concerned about issues related to capacity, consent, and substitute decision-making. In Australia, participation in research by people with cognitive impairment is governed by a national ethics statement and a patchwork of state and territorial laws that have widely varying rules. We contend that this legislative variation precludes a consistent approach to research governance and participation and hinders research that seeks to include people with impaired capacity. In this paper, we present key ethical principles, provide a comprehensive review of applicable legal rules in Australian states and territories, and highlight significant differences and ambiguities. Our analysis includes recommendations for reform to improve clarity and consistency in the law and reduce barriers that may exclude persons with dementia from participating in ethically approved research. Our recommendations seek to advance the national decision-making principles recommended by the Australian Law Reform Commission, which emphasize the rights of all adults to make their own decisions and for those with impaired capacity to have access to appropriate supports to help them make decisions that affect their lives.

摘要

研究对于增进对痴呆症的了解至关重要,但目前该疾病的负担超过了研究活动。研究往往将患有痴呆症和其他认知障碍的人排除在外,因为研究人员和伦理委员会担心与能力、同意和替代决策相关的问题。在澳大利亚,认知障碍者参与研究受一项国家伦理声明以及一系列各州和领地法律的约束,这些法律的规则差异很大。我们认为,这种立法差异排除了研究治理和参与的一致方法,并阻碍了旨在纳入能力受损者的研究。在本文中,我们提出关键的伦理原则,全面审查澳大利亚各州和领地适用的法律规则,并突出显著差异和模糊之处。我们的分析包括改革建议,以提高法律的清晰度和一致性,并减少可能将痴呆症患者排除在经伦理批准的研究之外的障碍。我们的建议旨在推进澳大利亚法律改革委员会推荐的国家决策原则,该原则强调所有成年人做出自己决定的权利,以及能力受损者获得适当支持以帮助他们做出影响其生活的决定的权利。

相似文献

1
Including People with Dementia in Research: An Analysis of Australian Ethical and Legal Rules and Recommendations for Reform.将痴呆症患者纳入研究:对澳大利亚伦理和法律规则及改革建议的分析
J Bioeth Inq. 2017 Sep;14(3):359-374. doi: 10.1007/s11673-017-9794-9. Epub 2017 Jun 20.
2
Ethical and legal aspects of research involving older people with cognitive impairment: A survey of dementia researchers in Australia.涉及认知障碍老年人的研究的伦理和法律方面:澳大利亚痴呆症研究人员的调查。
Int J Law Psychiatry. 2020 Jan-Feb;68:101534. doi: 10.1016/j.ijlp.2019.101534. Epub 2019 Dec 11.
3
Safeguarding research participants who lack decision-making capacity.保护缺乏决策能力的研究参与者。
Br J Nurs. 2016 Jul 14;25(13):766-7. doi: 10.12968/bjon.2016.25.13.766.
4
Planning Ahead for Dementia Research Participation: Insights from a Survey of Older Australians and Implications for Ethics, Law and Practice.为痴呆症研究参与提前规划:来自对澳大利亚老年人调查的见解及对伦理、法律和实践的影响。
J Bioeth Inq. 2019 Sep;16(3):415-429. doi: 10.1007/s11673-019-09929-x. Epub 2019 Jul 11.
5
Informed consent for research involving people with dementia: a grey area.涉及痴呆症患者的研究的知情同意:一个灰色地带。
Contemp Nurse. 2010 Feb-Mar;34(2):230-6. doi: 10.5172/conu.2010.34.2.230.
6
The UK Mental Capacity Act and consent to research participation: asking the right question.英国《精神能力法案》与同意参与研究:问对问题。
J Med Ethics. 2018 Jan;44(1):44-46. doi: 10.1136/medethics-2016-103996. Epub 2017 Aug 5.
7
Advance Research Directives: Legal and Ethical Issues and Insights from a National Survey of Dementia Researchers in Australia.预先指示研究:澳大利亚全国痴呆症研究人员调查的法律和伦理问题及启示
Med Law Rev. 2020 May 1;28(2):375-400. doi: 10.1093/medlaw/fwaa003.
8
Is there a problem with the status quo? Debating the need for standalone ethical guidelines for research with people who use alcohol and other drugs.现状是否存在问题?探讨针对使用酒精和其他毒品的人群进行研究制定独立伦理准则的必要性。
Drug Alcohol Rev. 2014 Nov;33(6):637-42. doi: 10.1111/dar.12140. Epub 2014 Mar 30.
9
Ethical research with the mentally disordered.针对精神障碍患者的伦理研究。
Can J Psychiatry. 1997 Jun;42(5):485-91. doi: 10.1177/070674379704200504.
10
Research participation of individuals with dementia.患有痴呆症的个体的研究参与情况。
Res Gerontol Nurs. 2009 Apr;2(2):94-102. doi: 10.3928/19404921-20090401-01.

引用本文的文献

1
My new home: study protocol for a prospective cohort study on the long-term personality development and short-term processes during transitions into nursing homes.我的新家:一项关于养老院入住期间长期人格发展和短期过程的前瞻性队列研究的研究方案。
BMC Geriatr. 2025 Aug 19;25(1):640. doi: 10.1186/s12877-025-06300-1.
2
'It's not making a decision, it's prompting the discussions': a qualitative study exploring stakeholders' views on the acceptability and feasibility of advance research planning (CONSULT-ADVANCE).“这不是做决定,而是促使讨论:一项定性研究,探讨利益相关者对预先研究计划(CONSULT-ADVANCE)的可接受性和可行性的看法。”
BMC Med Ethics. 2024 Jul 23;25(1):80. doi: 10.1186/s12910-024-01081-5.
3

本文引用的文献

1
Integrating Advance Research Directives into the European Legal Framework.将预先研究指令纳入欧洲法律框架。
Eur J Health Law. 2016 Apr;23(2):158-73. doi: 10.1163/15718093-12341380.
2
Australian clinical trial activity and burden of disease: an analysis of registered trials in National Health Priority Areas.澳大利亚临床试验活动与疾病负担:国家卫生重点领域注册试验分析。
Med J Aust. 2015 Jul 20;203(2):97-101. doi: 10.5694/mja14.00598.
3
Research involving subjects with Alzheimer's disease in Italy: the possible role of family members.
Methods and approaches to facilitate inclusion of the views, perspectives and preferences of people with moderate-to-severe dementia in research: A narrative systematic review.
促进中度至重度痴呆患者的观点、视角和偏好纳入研究的方法和途径:叙述性系统评价。
Int J Older People Nurs. 2024 Jan;19(1):e12594. doi: 10.1111/opn.12594. Epub 2023 Dec 11.
4
Expanding the ethnographic toolkit: Using medical documents to include kinless older adults living with dementia in qualitative research.拓展民族志工具包:在定性研究中使用医疗文件将无亲属的老年痴呆症患者纳入其中。
J Aging Stud. 2023 Jun;65:101140. doi: 10.1016/j.jaging.2023.101140. Epub 2023 May 10.
5
Factors influencing decisions about whether to participate in health research by people of diverse ethnic and cultural backgrounds: a realist review.影响不同族裔和文化背景人群参与健康研究决策的因素:一项实际主义综述。
BMJ Open. 2022 May 19;12(5):e058380. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2021-058380.
6
Participants' Comprehension of the Informed Consent in an Epidemiological Study on Dementia Prevalence: A Qualitative Study.痴呆症患病率流行病学研究中参与者对知情同意书的理解:一项定性研究
Front Psychiatry. 2021 Apr 7;12:656822. doi: 10.3389/fpsyt.2021.656822. eCollection 2021.
7
The full spectrum of ethical issues in dementia research: findings of a systematic qualitative review.痴呆症研究中的伦理问题全貌:一项系统性定性综述的结果
BMC Med Ethics. 2021 Mar 26;22(1):32. doi: 10.1186/s12910-020-00572-5.
8
Older adults' motivations to participate or not in epidemiological research. Qualitative inquiry on a study into dementia in Switzerland.老年人参与或不参与流行病学研究的动机。瑞士痴呆症研究的定性探究。
PLoS One. 2021 Feb 12;16(2):e0247141. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0247141. eCollection 2021.
9
Ethical and Methodological Considerations for Evaluating Participant Views on Alzheimer's and Dementia Research.评估参与者对阿尔茨海默病和痴呆症研究看法的伦理和方法学考虑因素。
J Empir Res Hum Res Ethics. 2021 Feb-Apr;16(1-2):88-104. doi: 10.1177/1556264620974898. Epub 2020 Nov 26.
10
Advances and challenges in conducting ethical trials involving populations lacking capacity to consent: A decade in review.缺乏同意能力人群参与的伦理试验的进展与挑战:十年回顾。
Contemp Clin Trials. 2020 Aug;95:106054. doi: 10.1016/j.cct.2020.106054. Epub 2020 Jun 8.
意大利针对阿尔茨海默病患者的研究:家庭成员的潜在作用。
BMC Med Ethics. 2015 Mar 4;16:12. doi: 10.1186/s12910-015-0009-9.
4
Psychometric Properties of a Decisional Capacity Screening Tool for Individuals Contemplating Participation in Alzheimer's Disease Research.用于考虑参与阿尔茨海默病研究的个体的决策能力筛查工具的心理测量特性。
J Alzheimers Dis. 2015;46(1):1-9. doi: 10.3233/JAD-142559.
5
Can we do better? Researchers' experiences with ethical review boards on projects with later life as a focus.我们能做得更好吗?研究人员在以晚年生活为重点的项目中与伦理审查委员会的经历。
J Alzheimers Dis. 2015;43(3):701-7. doi: 10.3233/JAD-141956.
6
Dementia research and advance consent: it is not about critical interests.痴呆症研究与预先同意:这与重大利益无关。
J Med Ethics. 2015 Aug;41(8):708-9. doi: 10.1136/medethics-2014-102445. Epub 2014 Sep 19.
7
Advance consent, critical interests and dementia research.预先同意、重大利益与痴呆症研究。
J Med Ethics. 2015 Aug;41(8):701-7. doi: 10.1136/medethics-2014-102024. Epub 2014 Aug 12.
8
Articulating the strategies for maximising the inclusion of people with dementia in qualitative research studies.阐明在定性研究中最大限度纳入痴呆症患者的策略。
Dementia (London). 2015 Nov;14(6):800-24. doi: 10.1177/1471301213512489. Epub 2014 Jan 8.
9
Double standards in special medical research: questioning the discrepancy between requirements for medical research involving incompetent adults and medical research involving children.特殊医学研究中的双重标准:质疑涉及无行为能力成年人的医学研究要求与涉及儿童的医学研究要求之间的差异。
J Law Med. 2013 Sep;21(1):47-52.
10
Improving understanding in the research informed consent process: a systematic review of 54 interventions tested in randomized control trials.提高研究知情同意过程中的理解:54 项随机对照试验中测试的干预措施的系统评价。
BMC Med Ethics. 2013 Jul 23;14:28. doi: 10.1186/1472-6939-14-28.