TY - JOUR
T1 - Demonstrating 'respect for persons' in clinical research
T2 - Findings from qualitative interviews with diverse genomics research participants
AU - Kraft, Stephanie A.
AU - Rothwell, Erin
AU - Shah, Seema K.
AU - Duenas, Devan M.
AU - Lewis, Hannah
AU - Muessig, Kristin
AU - Opel, Douglas J.
AU - Goddard, Katrina A.B.
AU - Wilfond, Benjamin S.
N1 - Funding Information:
Funding This study was funded by NHGRI grant K01HG010361 (PI: SAK) and the Clinical Research Scholars Program at the Seattle Children’s Research Institute Center for Clinical and Translational Research (no award number, PI: SAK). Additional support was provided by the CHARM study (U01HG007292, MPIs: BSW, KABG) and the CSER Coordinating Center (U24HG007307) as part of the CSER consortium funded by NHGRI with cofunding from NIMHD and NCI. The contents of this paper are solely the responsibility of the authors and do not necessarily represent the official views of the NIH. The CSER consortium thanks the staff and participants of all CSER studies for their important contributions. More information about CSER can be found at https://cser-consortium.org.
Publisher Copyright:
© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2021. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.
PY - 2021/12/1
Y1 - 2021/12/1
N2 - The ethical principle of 'respect for persons' in clinical research has traditionally focused on protecting individuals' autonomy rights, but respect for participants also includes broader, although less well understood, ethical obligations to regard individuals' rights, needs, interests and feelings. However, there is little empirical evidence about how to effectively convey respect to potential and current participants. To fill this gap, we conducted exploratory, qualitative interviews with participants in a clinical genomics implementation study. We interviewed 40 participants in English (n=30) or Spanish (n=10) about their experiences with respect in the study and perceptions of how researchers in a hypothetical observational study could convey respect or a lack thereof. Most interviewees were female (93%), identified as Hispanic/Latino(a) (43%) or non-Hispanic white (38%), reported annual household income under US$60 000 (70%) and did not have a Bachelor's degree (65%); 30% had limited health literacy. We identified four key domains for demonstrating respect: (1) personal study team interactions, with an emphasis on empathy, appreciation and non-judgment; (2) study communication processes, including following up and sharing results with participants; (3) inclusion, particularly ensuring materials are understandable and procedures are accessible; and (4) consent and authorisation, including providing a neutral informed consent and keeping promises regarding privacy protections. While the experience of respect is inherently subjective, these findings highlight four key domains that may meaningfully demonstrate respect to potential and current research participants. Further empirical and normative work is needed to substantiate these domains and evaluate how best to incorporate them into the practice of research.
AB - The ethical principle of 'respect for persons' in clinical research has traditionally focused on protecting individuals' autonomy rights, but respect for participants also includes broader, although less well understood, ethical obligations to regard individuals' rights, needs, interests and feelings. However, there is little empirical evidence about how to effectively convey respect to potential and current participants. To fill this gap, we conducted exploratory, qualitative interviews with participants in a clinical genomics implementation study. We interviewed 40 participants in English (n=30) or Spanish (n=10) about their experiences with respect in the study and perceptions of how researchers in a hypothetical observational study could convey respect or a lack thereof. Most interviewees were female (93%), identified as Hispanic/Latino(a) (43%) or non-Hispanic white (38%), reported annual household income under US$60 000 (70%) and did not have a Bachelor's degree (65%); 30% had limited health literacy. We identified four key domains for demonstrating respect: (1) personal study team interactions, with an emphasis on empathy, appreciation and non-judgment; (2) study communication processes, including following up and sharing results with participants; (3) inclusion, particularly ensuring materials are understandable and procedures are accessible; and (4) consent and authorisation, including providing a neutral informed consent and keeping promises regarding privacy protections. While the experience of respect is inherently subjective, these findings highlight four key domains that may meaningfully demonstrate respect to potential and current research participants. Further empirical and normative work is needed to substantiate these domains and evaluate how best to incorporate them into the practice of research.
KW - clinical trials
KW - informed consent
KW - research ethics
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85096715220&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85096715220&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1136/medethics-2020-106440
DO - 10.1136/medethics-2020-106440
M3 - Article
C2 - 33023975
AN - SCOPUS:85096715220
SN - 0306-6800
VL - 47
SP - E8
JO - Journal of Medical Ethics
JF - Journal of Medical Ethics
IS - 12
ER -