The quality of consent form structure in biomedical research: a study from Jordan and Sudan

Attitude towards donation of the excised foreskin after circumcision surgery for research: A study from Madinah, Saudi Arabia

Studies have shown the possibility of using the part of the foreskin removed after circumcision in the field of scientific and therapeutic research. Donations of tissues and organs are always associated with ethical challenges posed by bioethicists and societies to ensure the appropriate use of these tissues/organs. The purpose of this study was to understand the attitudes and awareness of parents/guardians regarding donation of excised foreskin to research and medical use. The study was based on a questionnaire and included 133 parents/guardians who visited Uhud Children's Hospital in Madinah, Saudi Arabia for newborn male circumcision. The results showed a high willingness (61.7%) to donate the extracted foreskin to research. The willingness to donate the extracted foreskin to research associated with undergraduate degree (P = 0.018), male sex (P = 0.011), high income (P = 0.029), and participation in previous research studies (P = 0.002). About 41.8% were convinced that written informed consent should be obtained before circumcision surgery, 38.1% (n = 51) were convinced that written informed consent should be taken after surgery, while the remaining 19.4% reported that the timing of written informed consent is unimportant. Finally, fear of excision of excess tissue (74.5%), lack of confidence in the research (68.6%), and potential for commercial use (64.7%) were the main barriers to unwillingness to donate the excised foreskin for research. In conclusion, a reasonable portion of Saudis agreed to donate their foreskin for research purposes. There is an urgent need to enhance awareness and attitudes towards tissue donation for research and therapeutic use.

Motivators and barriers towards clinical research participation: A population-based survey from an Arab MENA country

Jordan was the first Arab country to enact clinical research regulations. The country has a well-flourished pharmaceutical industry that leans heavily on clinical research (CR) for drug development and post-marketing surveillance. In this cross-sectional study, we sought to assess the public's awareness and attitude towards CR as well as their perceived motivators and barriers to CR participation. A population-based, self-administered questionnaire was distributed to the general public in Jordan. Among the 1061 participants in this survey, 74% reported being aware of CR. The majority (70%) agreed to the role of CR in health promotion. Online information and healthcare staff were the two main sources of CR information for the participants. About 25% of the participants received prior invitations to participate in CR with 21% agreeing to participate. However, most participants of the current study (63%) were willing to participate in future CR. Contributing to science, benefiting others, and promoting one's own health were the top motivating factors for participating in CR; while time constraints, fear of research procedure, and lack of interest were the most cited reasons for rejecting participation. Filling out questionnaire surveys, donating blood samples, and participating in physical examinations were the main CR contributions of the participants. Nearly 31% of the participants believed that CR is conducted in a responsible and ethical manner, while 57% did not have an opinion regarding the same matter. In addition, 49% and 44% were neutral with regards to the degree of harm and confidentiality posed by CR. While only 27% disagreed that CR exposes participants to some form of harm, 48% either strongly agreed (15%) or agreed (33%) that it maintains high level of confidentiality for participants. The current study provides insight into the public's perception of CR in Jordan as well as its motivating factors and perceived barriers towards participating in CR. We envisage to utilize this insight as an aid in the design of vigilant future awareness campaigns and recruitment strategies.

Sharing, reuse, and storage of biosamples among biomedical researchers in Jordan: Practice and concerns

BACKGROUND

Sharing and reuse biosamples can facilitate biomedical research. Little is known about researchers' perception and practice about sharing, reusing, and storing biosamples in Jordan. Therefore, the current study aimed to evaluate the practices of biomedical researchers in Jordan regarding biosamples management.

METHODS

The study was cross-sectional and involved biomedical researchers from different parts of Jordan. A questionnaire was designed to achieve the aim of this study. The questionnaire was web-based and distributed via e-mails using Google forms.

RESULTS

Opinions of Jordanian biomedical researchers from different academic ranks and institutional backgrounds were measured and recorded anonymously. The majority of the sample was males (57.9%), from public universities (64.3%), and (64.6%) were from health-related fields. About 82.9% of participants stored biosamples using codes, whereas the rest used the subject's name. Sharing of biosamples was commonly practiced by 61.7% of Jordanian researchers locally, while 47.2% of the Jordanian researchers shared biosamples overseas. The reuse of biosamples in other projects was reported to be 55.4%. The majority explained the possibility of reusing and sharing biosamples in the consent form (range: 53-58%). Sharing and reusing biosamples were associated with gender, the number of publications in peer-reviewed international journals, and academic rank (P<0.05).

CONCLUSION

Sharing and reusing biosamples are common among Jordanian biomedical researchers. Therefore, ethically grounded biosamples sharing and reuse standards are essential for protecting human subjects' rights and privacy in Jordan.

Ethical Considerations in Clinical Trials for Disorders of Consciousness

As the clinical trial landscape for patients with disorders of consciousness (DoC) expands, consideration of associated ethical challenges and opportunities is of ever-increasing importance. Responsible conduct of research in the vulnerable population of persons with DoC, including those with coma, vegetative state/unresponsive wakefulness syndrome (VS/UWS), minimally conscious state (MCS), covert cortical processing (CCP), and cognitive motor dissociation (CMD), demands proactive deliberation of unique ethical issues that may arise and the adoption of robust protections to safeguard patients, surrogates, and other key stakeholders. Here we identify and critically evaluate four central categories of ethical considerations in clinical trials involving participants with DoC: (1) autonomy, respect for persons and informed consent of individuals with liminal consciousness; (2) balancing unknown benefits and risks, especially considering the epistemological gap between behavior and consciousness that complicates ordinary ascription of subjective states; (3) disclosure to surrogates and clinical teams of investigational results pertaining to consciousness; and (4) justice considerations, including equitable access to clinical trial enrollment across communities and geographies. We outline guiding principles and research opportunities for clinicians, neuroethicists, and researchers engaged in DoC clinical trials to advance ethical study design and deployment in this complex yet crucial area of investigation.

Enhancing the ethical conduct of a longitudinal cluster-randomized trial of psychosocial stimulation intervention for children with complicated severe acute malnutrition through Rapid Ethical Assessment: a qualitative study

Background

Informed consent is a universally accepted precondition for scientific researches involving human participants. However, various factors influence the process of obtaining authentic informed consent, and researchers particularly working in resource-poor countries often face considerable difficulties in implementing the universally recommended procedures for obtaining informed consent. We have conducted this Rapid Ethical Assessment (REA) to accommodate the local cultural norms and to understand the relevant ethical issues in the Silti community before the conduct of a cluster-randomized controlled trial.

Methods

This REA was conducted in two purposively selected Woredas/Districts and Worabe Town administration of Silti Zone. Data were collected using in-depth interviews and focus group discussions. Purposive and convenient sampling techniques were used to select respondents. Five in-depth interviews and 15 Focus Group Discussions were conducted in the Amharic language. The collected data was transcribed, translated, and analyzed using a thematic approach.

Result

Most of the community members never heard about research and therapeutic misconception was common. In the area, the permission of people working in the formal and informal community administration is essential before approaching individuals. The male head of the household should also be involved in the decision before individual household members participate in research. Furthermore, sensitizing the community using public and religious gatherings was suggested before individual recruitment. In the consent process, delivering selected information particularly the purpose and benefits of the research was emphasized and the tendency of preferring verbal consent was documented despite the willingness of the individuals to sign on the consent form. Local health workers were identified as appropriate personnel to communicate information and the procedures of the research were found to be acceptable. However, the value of small incentives was suggested to motivate potential participants. Finally, involving all concerned stakeholders and respecting the cultural norm of the community was emphasized.

Conclusion

Through REA, we understand the research awareness of the community, their expectation, and the cultural norms relevant to the ethical conduct of research. It enabled us to devise culturally sensitive and scientifically sound strategies to secure authentic informed consent. The process of conducting REA was found to be feasible, quick, and efficient.

Graduate students reported practices regarding the issue of informed consent and maintaining of data confidentiality in a developing country

Research involving human subjects requires strict adherence to ethical principles, including informed consent and assuring data confidentiality. Herein, a questionnaire was utilized to assess compliance of graduate students who conduct research involving human subjects in Jordan with proper practices related to informed consent and maintaining of data confidentiality. Among the 251 respondents, 55.4% were from health-related fields, 61.4% undertook research involving humans, and 48.6% did research requiring institutional review board approval. Only 37.1% of respondents reported exposure to research ethics education during their graduate study. Satisfactory adherence to informed consent practices was reported at rates of 56.0%-67.5%. Satisfactory adherence to practices related to data confidentiality and study participants' anonymity was reported at rates of 67.3%-74.7%. Sharing of data or samples with others was reported at a rate of 24.3%. The rates of adherence to proper informed consent practices and practices that maintain data confidentiality were less than ideal. Significant policy changes need to be implemented to address these issues.

Informed Consent Form Challenges for Genetic Research in Jordan

Background

Informed consent is an obligatory requirement for research engaging human subjects. Informed consent form (ICF) should be provided for human subjects to confirm their willingness for voluntary participation in a study. Ethical and legal obligations necessitate the presence of informed consent essential items to be built into the ICF.

Objective

To evaluate the content of ICFs obtained from different genetic studies accomplished in Jordan and their adherence to ethical guidelines proposed by the International Conference on Harmonization—Good Clinical Practice (ICHGCP).

Methods and Measures

A total of 44 ICFs obtained from master theses and grant proposals at two major universities in Jordan were analyzed according to the good clinical practice criteria proposed by ICHGCP. ICFs were scored for the presence or absence of ICF main items/categories.

Results

Results show inadequate information present in the examined ICFs. The highest information score was 17 out of 20, while the lowest score was one out of 20. The average score for all studied ICFs was 6.18±3.65. Among essential items/categories that were absent from the majority of studied ICFs were a statement about voluntary participation, confidentiality of data, compensation to study participants, risk/benefits of the study, and researchers’ contact information.

Conclusion

The ICFs were missing a number of required items. This could reflect inadequate knowledge about minimal informed consent requirements among Jordanian investigators highlighting the need for research ethical training in the country.