Ethics of clinical research with mentally ill persons

Ethics Guideline Development for Neuroscience Research involving Patients with Mental Illness in Japan

This study aims to develop guidelines of key concepts and specific considerations to make the research more ethical when conducting neurological examinations and treatment interventions in mentally ill patients. We analyzed guideline development theory and literature, previous issues, and discussions with specialists of philosophy, medicine, sociology, and bioethics. The selection of research participants, drafting of intervention plans, and informed consent process were examined with reference to the dual burden; the minimal risk as a general rule of ethical allowance levels, assent and dissent to assess the individual's judgment capacity for consent, relational autonomy for personal consent with assistance by the proxy, and risk/benefit assessments. When conducting studies, this guideline requires that these three processes be set up appropriately on a case-by-case basis.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s41649-023-00240-x.

Bioethical reflexivity and requirements of valid consent: conceptual tools

Background

Despite existing international, regional and national guidance on how to obtain valid consent to health-related research, valid consent remains both a practical and normative challenge. This challenge persists despite additional evidence-based guidance obtained through conceptual and empirical research in specific localities on the same subject. The purpose of this paper is to provide an account for why, despite this guidance, this challenge still persist and suggest conceptual resources that can help make sense of this problem and eventually mitigate it’.

Main body

This paper argues that despite the existence of detailed official guidance and prior conceptual and empirical research on how to obtain valid consent, the question of ‘how to obtain and ascertain valid consent to participation in health-related research’ cannot always be fully answered by exclusive reference to pre-determined criteria/guidance provided by the guidelines and prior research’. To make intelligible why this is so and how this challenge could be allayed, the paper proposes six concepts. The first five of these are intended to account for the persistent seeming inadequacies of existing guidelines. These are fact-skepticism; guideline insufficiency; generality; context-neutrality and presumptiveness. As an outcome of these five, the paper analyzes and recommends a sixth, called bioethical reflexivity. Bioethical reflexivity is reckoned as a handy tool, skill, and attitude by which, in addition to guidance from context-specific research, the persisting challenges can be further eased.

Conclusions

Existing ethical guidelines on how to obtain valid consent to health-related research are what they ought to be – general, presumptive and context-neutral. This explains their seeming inadequacies whenever they are being applied in concrete situations. Hence, the challenges being encountered while obtaining valid consent can be significantly eased if we appreciate the guidelines’ nature and what this means for their implementation. There is also a need to cultivate reflexive mindsets plus the relevant skills needed to judiciously close the unavoidable gaps between guidelines and their application in concrete cases. This equally applies to the gaps which cannot be filled by reference to additional guidance from prior conceptual and empirical research in specific contexts.

Conflicts of interest in psychiatry: strategies to cultivate literacy in daily practice

The relationship between psychiatry and pharmaceutical companies has come under scrutiny during the past decade. Concerns are growing that financial ties of psychiatrists to the pharmaceutical industry may unduly influence professional judgments involving the primary interests of patients. Such conflicts of interest threaten the public trust in psychiatry. The goal of conflict of interest policies is to protect the integrity of professional judgment and to preserve public trust. The disclosure of individual and institutional financial relationships is a critical but limited first step in the process of identifying and responding to conflicts of interest. Conflict of interest policies and procedures can be strengthened by engaged psychiatrists, researchers, institutions, and professional associations in developing policies and consensus standards. Research on conflicts of interest can provide a stronger evidence base for policy design and implementation. Society has traditionally granted the medical profession considerable autonomy and may be willing to continue do so in the case of conflicts of interest. Nevertheless, concern is growing that stronger measures are needed. To avoid undue regulatory burdens, psychiatrists can play a vital role in designing responsible and reasonable conflict of interest policies that reduce the risks of bias and the loss of trust. Psychiatrists and the institutions that carry out research, education, clinical care, and practice guideline development must recognize public concerns about conflicts of interest and take effective measures soon to maintain public trust with a cultural change in the practice of psychiatry, from reactive treatment-seeking for mental illness to proactive advocacy for patients.

Validation of Chinese version of the MacArthur Competence Assessment Tool for Clinical Research (MacCAT-CR) in patients with schizophrenia spectrum disorders

There is a lack of validated instruments assessing the decision-making capacity to consent to clinical research of patients with schizophrenia spectrum disorders who speak Chinese. This study aimed to determine the validity and reliability of the Chinese version of MacArthur Competence Assessment Tool for Clinical Research (MacCAT-CR). The MacCAT-CR using a hypothetical study, the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS), the Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE) assessed 139 patients with schizophrenia or schizoaffective disorder. The Cronbach's alpha coefficient was 0.74. The intra-class coefficients for understanding, appreciation, and reasoning scores ranged from 0.53 to 0.81. Regarding validity, the understanding, appreciation and reasoning scores were negatively correlated with the PANSS (r ranged from -0.27 to -0.33), and the negative subscale score (r ranged from -0.31 to -0.37) as well as positively correlated with the MMSE (r ranged from 0.26 to 0.43). All pvalues were less than 0.01. The factor analysis explained 57.6 % of the total variance; specifically, Components 1 and 2 contributed 44.5% and 13.1 % of the variance respectively. These findings indicate that the Chinese version of the MacCAT-CR is a reliable and valid instrument to assess the decision-making capacity to consent to clinical research of patients with schizophrenia spectrum disorders.