Revised 'Common Rule' Shapes Protections For Research Participants

Adolescent Assent and Reconsent for Biobanking: Recent Developments and Emerging Ethical Issues

Research biobanks that enroll minors face important practical, ethical, and regulatory challenges in reconsenting participants when they reach the age of 18. Federal regulations governing research in the United States provide minimal guidance and allow for a range of practices, including waiving the requirement to obtain reconsent. Some commentators have argued that institutional review boards should indeed grant such waivers, given the low risks of biobank-based research and the impracticality of contacting all participants when they turn 18. There is also significant ethical debate about the age at which adolescents can make authentic, autonomous decisions regarding their research participation. This paper reviews these issues in detail, describes the current state of the ethical discussion, and outlines evidence-based policies for enrolling minors into research biobanks.

Research participant understanding and engagement in an institutional, self-consent biobank model

The number of institutional and governmental biobanks and the target enrollment sizes of modern biobanks are increasing, affording more opportunities for the public to participate in biobanking efforts. In parallel with these expansions are pressures to increase the efficiency of obtaining informed consent using shorter consent forms that cover a broader scope of research and increasingly include provisions for return of research or clinical genetic test results to participants. Given these changes, how well these participants understand genetics, their level of understanding of what they are consenting to, and their wishes to engage longitudinally and receive biobank results are not well understood. We surveyed participants in a large, medical system-based biobank who had enrolled through a two-page, self-consent process about their baseline knowledge of genetics, understanding and recall of the consent process, wishes for future contact and engagement, and level of interest in receiving clinical genetic testing results. A total of 856 consented persons participated in the survey (67% women; 67% white). Participants' general reported genetics knowledge was relatively high (mean 11.60 of 15 questions answered correctly) as was recall of key elements from the two-page consent form. Overall participant enthusiasm for future contact by the biobank and for receiving clinical genetic testing results was high. The use of a two-page, self-consent process in a large, institutional biobank resulted in high levels of consent recall and enthusiasm for future ongoing engagement and receipt of genetic testing results by participants.

Revised Common Rule Changes to the Consent Process and Consent Form

Background: The Federal Policy for the Protection of Human Subjects-the Common Rule-was revised in 2017 to reduce administrative burdens for low-risk research while enhancing protections for human subjects enrolled in greater-than-minimal-risk trials. These enhanced protections involve changes to the consent process. Methods: We review the general requirements applicable to the consent process, as well as the additional elements of consent mandated by the revisions to the Common Rule. The regulations apply to federally funded studies and are optional for non-federally funded studies. Results: Two new general requirements for the consent process, one basic required element for the consent form, and three optional additional elements for the consent form were added in an effort to improve potential subjects' understanding of research studies and to facilitate the exchange of information between the research staff and potential subjects. Important information about the study should be extracted into a concise key information section to help potential subjects make informed decisions regarding participation. Conclusion: The revisions to the Common Rule are intended to enhance human subject protection by providing more information in an understandable form during the consent process. The new consent elements aim to increase transparency and help improve clarity.

Conflicts of Interest in Human Subject Research: The Insufficiency of U.S. and International Standards

Researchers, as well as individuals and institutions that oversee their conduct, sometimes have conflicts of interest that weaken or render ineffective efforts to protect human research subjects. This article analyzes United States and international standards used to address conflicts of interest and reviews evidence regarding compliance. It finds current standards are insufficient and recommends that the federal government and international organizations adopt stronger legal standards that require resolving most significant conflicts of interest and specifying how to manage conflicts of interest not resolved.

Concise Consent Forms Appreciated-Still Not Comprehended: Applying Revised Common Rule Guidelines in Online Studies

As informed consent documents have historically gotten lengthier, recent revisions to federal Common Rule guidelines now require consent forms that are "concise" and presented in ways that "facilitate comprehension." The current research sought to apply these guidelines by developing a consent process for an online study that was only 71 words and also allowed participants a choice to either continue directly to the study or learn more about the study to which they were consenting. All participants (100%, N = 429) decided to continue directly to the study, choosing to forgo additional information about the study and the institutional review board (IRB) approval process. Participants indicated they liked this streamlined consent process, even though on average they only comprehended about half of the information this streamlined process contained. A plurality of participants indicated they would like to see this style of streamlined consent continued in future online studies. However, if we want to continue referring to informed consent as informed, future research should be welcomed and supported by IRBs to seek ways to apply the newest Common Rule guidelines while increasing comprehension; otherwise, informed consent will likely always remain an oxymoron.

Genomics, Big Data, and Broad Consent: a New Ethics Frontier for Prevention Science

Emerging technologies for analyzing biospecimens have led to advances in understanding the interacting role of genetics and environment on development and individual responsivity to prevention and intervention programs. The scientific study of gene-environment influences has also benefited from the growth of Big Data tools that allow linking genomic data to health, educational, and other information stored in large integrated datasets. These advances have created a new frontier of ethical challenges for scientists as they collect, store, or engage in secondary use of potentially identifiable information and biospecimens. To address challenges arising from technological advances and the expanding contexts in which potentially identifiable information and biospecimens are collected and stored, the Office of Human Research Protections has revised federal regulations for the protection of human subjects. The revised regulations create a new format, content, and transparency requirements for informed consent, including a new mechanism known as broad consent. Broad consent offers participants a range of choices regarding consent for the storage and future use of their personally identifiable data. These regulations have important implications for how prevention scientists and oversight boards acquire participant consent for the collection, storage, and future use of their data by other investigators for scientific purposes significantly different from the original study. This article describes regulatory changes and challenges affecting traditional informed consent for prevention research, followed by a description of the rationale and requirements for obtaining broad consent, and concludes with a discussion of future challenges involving ongoing transparency and protections for participants and their communities.

Findings from 2017 on Health Information Management

OBJECTIVE

To summarize the recent literature and research and present a selection of the best papers published in 2017 in the field of Health Information Management (HIM) and Health Informatics.

METHODS

A systematic review of the literature was performed by the two HIM section editors of the International Medical Informatics Association (IMIA) Yearbook with the help of a medical librarian. We searched bibliographic databases for HIM-related papers using both MeSH descriptors and keywords in titles and abstracts. A shortlist of 15 candidate best papers was first selected by section editors before being peer-reviewed by independent external reviewers.

RESULTS

Health Information Exchange was a major theme within candidate best papers. The four papers ultimately selected as 'Best Papers' represent themes that include health information exchange, governance and policy issues, results of health information exchange, and methods of integrating information from multiple sources. Other articles within the candidate best papers include these themes as well as those focusing on authentication and de-identification and usability of information systems.

CONCLUSIONS

The papers discussed in the HIM section of IMIA Yearbook reflect the overall theme of the 2018 edition of the Yearbook, i.e., the tension between privacy and access to information. While most of the papers focused on health information exchange, which reflects the "access" side of the equation, most of the others addressed privacy issues. This synopsis discusses these key issues at the intersection of HIM and informatics.

Omics research ethics considerations

BACKGROUND

Pending revisions to the Common Rule include topics consistent with respect for persons, justice, and beneficence for research subjects in studies using omics technologies and are relevant to omics research.

PURPOSE

Synthesize trends in bioethics, precision health, and omics nursing science for novice and experienced nursing scholars from which to consider bioethics questions.

METHODS

Review topics addressed in the National Institute of Nursing Research (NINR) strategic plan, Common Rule pending revisions, and publications regarding human subjects protection policies.

DISCUSSION

Omics research involves decisions regarding understandable informed consent, broad consent, data sharing, trust, equal benefit, equal access, societal variables, privacy, data security, and return of findings to participants.

CONCLUSION

Principles of respect for persons, justice, and beneficence as articulated in the Belmont report and reflected in the American Nurses Association (ANA) Code of Ethics provide guidance for human subjects protection procedures to advance omics and nursing science.

Assessing usefulness and researcher satisfaction with consent form templates

Introduction

We aimed to improve the research consenting process by developing and evaluating simplified consent forms.

Methods

Four templates written at the eighth-tenth grade reading level were developed and trialed by a group of experts in clinical research, health literacy, national regulatory requirements, and end users. Researchers from protocols which had received expedited review were surveyed at 2 time points regarding their use and assessment of the templates.

Results

At baseline 18/86 (20.9%) responding researchers had heard of the templates and 5 (5.8%) reported that they had used them; 2 years later, 54.2% (32/59) had heard of the templates and 87.5% (28/32) had used them (p<0.001).

Conclusions

Consent form templates may be one mechanism to improve patient comprehension of research protocols as well as efficiency of the review process, but require considerable time for development and implementation, and one key to their success is involvement and support from the IRB and technical staff.