Top

Gepubliceerd in:

07-08-2021 | Original Paper

Maternal Perceptions of Safeguards for Research Involving Children

Auteurs: Maryam Rostami, Jane Paik Kim, Laura Turner-Essel, Laura Weiss Roberts

Gepubliceerd in: Journal of Child and Family Studies | Uitgave 5/2022

Abstract

The vitality of clinical research and the health of the public relies on continued efforts to engage children in clinical research in a fully protected and ethically robust manner. Parents serve as proxy decision-makers assessing the risks and benefits of any given study in order to do what is in the best interest of their child. This study investigated maternal perceptions of research safeguards and mothers’ willingness to enroll their children in clinical research studies. We hypothesized that mothers’ perceptions of the protectiveness of safeguard procedures utilized in clinical research would be associated with mothers’ willingness to enroll their children in research studies with such safeguards. Through a survey conducted via Amazon Mechanical Turk, mothers were asked to rate the perceived protectiveness of four safeguard procedures (confidential data coding, data and safety monitoring boards (DSMBs), institutional review boards (IRBs), and informed consent) and the degree to which they were willing to have their child participate in research studies in the presence of each of the four safeguard procedures. Respondents generally perceived safeguard procedures to be protective. Mothers’ trust in researchers’ honesty positively impacted perceptions of the protectiveness of research safeguard procedures and willingness to enroll children in research. Mothers of only healthy children perceived research safeguards to be more protective than mothers with at least one child with at least one health issue. This study provides insight into whether maternal perceptions of the protectiveness of different safeguard procedures are associated with mothers’ willingness to enroll their children in research.

vorige artikel Parental Psychological Control, Social Capital, Substance Use, and Driving Under the Influence among College Students: Sex Differences

volgende artikel Examining the Relationship between Social Support, Parenting Stress, and Depression in South Korean Single Mothers

Abbott, L., & Grady, C. (2011). A systematic review of the empirical literature evaluating IRBs: what we know and what we still need to learn. Journal of Empirical Research on Human Research Ethics, 6(1), 3–19. https://doi.org/10.1525/jer.2011.6.1.3.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Aitken, M., de St. Jorre, J., Pagliari, C., Jepson, R., & Cunningham-Burley, S. (2016). Public responses to the sharing and linkage of health data for research purposes: a systematic review and thematic synthesis of qualitative studies. BMC Medical Ethics, 17(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12910-016-0153-x.

Andrews, S. M., Raspa, M., Edwards, A., Moultrie, R., Turner-Brown, L., Wagner, L., Alvarez Rivas, A., Frisch, M. K., & Wheeler, A. C. (2020). “Just tell me what’s going on”: The views of parents of children with genetic conditions regarding the research use of their child’s electronic health record. Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association, 27(3), 429–436. https://doi.org/10.1093/jamia/ocz208.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Arevalo, M., Heredia, N. I., Krasny, S., Rangel, M. L., Gatus, L. A., McNeill, L. H., & Fernandez, M. E. (2016). Mexican-American perspectives on participation in clinical trials: a qualitative study. Contemporary Clinical Trials Communications, 4, 52–57. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conctc.2016.06.009.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Ballard, H. O., Shook, L. A., Desai, N. S., & Anand, K. J. (2004). Neonatal research and the validity of informed consent obtained in the perinatal period. Journal of Perinatology, 24(7), 409–415. https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.jp.7211142.CrossRefPubMed

Barsdorf, N. W., & Wassenaar, D. R. (2005). Racial differences in public perceptions of voluntariness of medical research participants in South Africa. Social Science & Medicine, 60(5), 1087–1098. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socscimed.2004.06.039.CrossRef

Buhrmester, M. D., Talaifar, S., & Gosling, S. D. (2018). An evaluation of Amazon’s Mechanical Turk, its rapid rise, and its effective use. Perspectives on Psychological Science. https://doi.org/10.1177/1745691617706516.

Chandler, J., & Shapiro, D. (2016). Conducting clinical research using crowdsourced convenience samples. Annual Review of Clinical Psychology. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-clinpsy-021815-093623.CrossRefPubMed

Conrad, B., & Horner, S. (1997). Issues in pediatric research: safeguarding the children. Journal of the Society of Pediatric Nurses, 2(4), 163–171. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1744-6155.1997.tb00020.x.CrossRefPubMed

Coyne, I., & Harder, M. (2011). Children’s participation in decision-making: balancing protection with shared decision-making using a situational perspective. Journal of Child Health Care, 15(4), 312–319. https://doi.org/10.1177/1367493511406570.CrossRefPubMed

Criteria for IRB Approval of Research, 21 C.F.R. Section 56.111 (2020).

Dunn, L. B., Kim, D. S., Fellows, I. E., & Palmer, B. W. (2008). Worth the risk? Relationship of incentives to risk and benefit perceptions and willingness to participate in schizophrenia research. Schizophrenia Bulletin, 35(4), 730–737. https://doi.org/10.1093/schbul/sbn003.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Easter, M. M., Davis, A. M., & Henderson, G. E. (2004). Confidentiality: more than a linkage file and a locked drawer. IRB, 26(2), 13–17.CrossRef

Ellenberg, S.S., Fleming, T.R., DeMets, D.L. (2019). Statistical, philosophical, and ethical issues in data monitoring. In Data Monitoring Committees in Clinical Trials (pp. 265–334). https://doi.org/10.1002/9781119512684.ch8.

Eyal, N. (2014). Using informed consent to save trust. Journal of Medical Ethics, 40(7), 437–444. https://doi.org/10.1136/medethics-2012-100490.CrossRefPubMed

Fiscella, K., Sanders, M., Holder, T., Carroll, J. K., Luque, A., Cassells, A., Johnson, B. A., Williams, S. K., & Tobin, J. N. (2020). The role of data and safety monitoring boards in implementation trials: when are they justified? Journal of Clinical and Translational Science, 4(3), 229–232. https://doi.org/10.1017/cts.2020.19.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Fleming, T. R., Ellenberg, S., & DeMets, D. L. (2002). Monitoring clinical trials: Issues and controversies regarding confidentiality. Statistics in Medicine, 21(19), 2843–2851. https://doi.org/10.1002/sim.1288.CrossRefPubMed

Ford, J. G., Howerton, M. W., Lai, G. Y., Gary, T. L., Bolen, S., Gibbons, M. C. & Bass, E. B. (2008). Barriers to recruiting underrepresented populations to cancer clinical trials: a systematic review. Cancer, 112(2), 228–242. https://doi.org/10.1002/cncr.23157.CrossRefPubMed

Gillan, C. M., & Daw, N. D. (2016). Taking psychiatry research online. Neuron, 91, 19–23. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuron.2016.06.002.CrossRefPubMed

Grady, C. (2019). Bioethics in the oversight of clinical research: Institutional Review Boards and Data and Safety Monitoring Boards. Kennedy Institute of Ethics Journal, 29(1), 33–49. https://doi.org/10.1353/ken.2019.0009.CrossRefPubMed

Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation. (2018). Women, work, and family health: Key findings from the 2017 Kaiser women’s health survey. https://www.kff.org/womens-health-policy/issue-brief/women-work-and-family-health-key-findings-from-the-2017-kaiser-womens-health-survey/.

Heredia, N. I., Krasny, S., Strong, L. L., Von Hatten, L., Nguyen, L., Reininger, B. M., McNeill, L. H., & Fernández, M. E. (2017). Community perceptions of biobanking participation: a qualitative study among Mexican-Americans in three Texas cities. Public Health Genomics, 20(1), 46–57. https://doi.org/10.1159/000452093.CrossRefPubMed

Hicks, L. K., Laupacis, A., & Slutsky, A. S. (2007). A primer on data and safety monitoring boards: mission, methods, and controversies. Intensive Care Medicine, 33(10), 1815–1818. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00134-007-0794-9.CrossRefPubMed

Hoberman, A., Shaikh, N., Bhatnagar, S., Haralam, M. A., Kearney, D. H., Colborn, D. K., Kienholz, M. L., Wang, L., Bunker, C. H., Keren, R., Carpenter, M. A., Greenfield, S. P., Pohl, H. G., Mathews, R., Moxey-Mims, M., & Chesney, R. W. (2013). Factors that influence parental decisions to participate in clinical research: Consenters vs nonconsenters. JAMA Pediatrics, 167(6), 561–566. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamapediatrics.2013.1050.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Holm, S. (1979). A simple sequentially rejective multiple test procedure. Scandinavian Journal of Statistics, 6(2), 65–70.

Kim, J. P., Rostami, M., & Roberts, L. W. (2020). Attitudes of mothers regarding willingness to enroll their children in research. Journal of Empirical Research on Human Research Ethics, 15(5), 452–464. https://doi.org/10.1177/1556264620927583.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Kodish, E. (2003). Informed consent for pediatric research: is it really possible? The Journal of Pediatrics, 142(2), 89–90. https://doi.org/10.1067/mpd.2003.64.CrossRefPubMed

Kölch, M., Ludolph, A. G., Plener, P. L., Fangerau, H., Vitiello, B., & Fegert, J. M. (2010). Safeguarding children’s rights in psychopharmacological research: ethical and legal issues. Current pharmaceutical design, 16(22), 2398–2406. https://doi.org/10.2174/138161210791959881.CrossRefPubMed

Lemaire, F., & Brun-Buisson, C. (2000). Are institutional review boards effective in safeguarding patients in intensive care units? Current Opinion in Anaesthesiology, 13(2), 195–201. https://doi.org/10.1097/00001503-200004000-00020.CrossRefPubMed

Lounsbery, K. (2018). Editorial: healthcare’s primary decision-maker is female. NRC Health. https://nrchealth.com/editorial-healthcares-primary-decision-maker-female/.

Madden, L., Shilling, V., Woolfall, K., Sowden, E., Smyth, R. L., Williamson, P. R., & Young, B. (2016). Questioning assent: how are children’s views included as families make decisions about clinical trials? Child: Care, Health and Development, 42(6), 900–908. https://doi.org/10.1111/cch.12347.CrossRef

Mainous, III, A. G., Smith, D. W., Geesey, M. E., & Tilley, B. C. (2006). Development of a measure to assess patient trust in medical researchers. Annals of Family Medicine, 4(3), 247–252. https://doi.org/10.1370/afm.541.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Mårtenson, E. K., & Fägerskiöld, A. M. (2008). A review of children’s decision-making competence in health care. Journal of Clinical Nursing, 17(23), 3131–3141. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2702.2006.01920.x.CrossRefPubMed

Miller, V. A., Drotar, D., & Kodish, E. (2004). Children’s competence for assent and consent: a review of empirical findings. Ethics & Behavior, 14(3), 255–295. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327019eb1403_3.CrossRef

Miller, V. A., Reynolds, W. W., & Nelson, R. M. (2008). Parent–child roles in decision making about medical research. Ethics and Behavior, 18, 161–181. https://doi.org/10.1080/10508420802063947.CrossRef

Munir, K. M. (2016). The co-occurrence of mental disorders in children and adolescents with intellectual disability/intellectual developmental disorder. Current Opinion in Psychiatry, 29(2), 95–102. https://doi.org/10.1097/YCO.0000000000000236.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Olusanya, B. O., Davis, A. C., Wertlieb, D., Boo, N. Y., Nair, M., Halpern, R., Kuper, H., Breinbauer, C., de Vries, P. J., Gladstone, M., Halfon, N., Kancherla, V., Mulaudzi, M. C., Kakooza-Mwesige, A., Ogbo, F. A., Olusanya, J. O., Williams, A. N., Wright, S. M., Manguerra, H., & Kassebaum, N. J. (2018). Developmental disabilities among children younger than 5 years in 195 countries and territories, 1990–2016: a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2016. The Lancet Global Health, 6(10), e1100–e1121. https://doi.org/10.1016/s2214-109x(18)30309-7.CrossRef

Pickler, R. H., & Martin, A. T. (2010). Protection of children in research. Journal of Pediatric Health Care, 24(1), 66–68. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pedhc.2009.08.011.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Resnik, D. B. (2015). Some reflections on evaluating institutional review board effectiveness. Contemporary Clinical Trials, 45(Pt B), 261–264. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cct.2015.09.018.CrossRefPubMed

Roberts, L. W., & Kim, J. P. (2014). Giving voice to study volunteers: comparing views of mentally ill, physically ill, and healthy protocol participants on ethical aspects of clinical research. Journal of Psychiatric Research, 56, 90–97. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpsychires.2014.05.007.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Roberts, L. W., & Kim, J. P. (2017). Receptiveness to participation in genetic research: a pilot study comparing views of people with depression, diabetes, or no illness. Journal of Psychiatric Research, 94, 156–162. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpsychires.2017.07.002.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Roberts, L. W., Warner, T. D., Anderson, C. T., Smithpeter, M. V., & Rogers, M. K. (2004). Schizophrenia research participants’ responses to protocol safeguards: recruitment, consent, and debriefing. Schizophrenia Research, 67, 283–291. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0920-9964(03)00101-4.CrossRefPubMed

Roberts, L. W., Warner, T. D., Brody, J. L., Roberts, B., Lauriello, J., & Lyketsos, C. (2002). Patient and psychiatrist ratings of hypothetical schizophrenia research protocols: assessment of harm potential and factors influencing participation decisions. American Journal of Psychiatry, 159, 573–584. https://doi.org/10.1176/appi.ajp.159.4.573.CrossRef

Rosenfeld, S. J. (2020). Institutional review board assessment-balancing efficiency and quality. The Ochsner Journal, 20(1), 50–55. https://doi.org/10.31486/toj.19.0075.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Rossi, W. C., Reynolds, W., & Nelson, R. M. (2003). Child assent and parental permission in pediatric research. Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics, 24, 131–148. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1024690712019.CrossRefPubMed

Rothstein, M. A. (2010). Is deidentification sufficient to protect health privacy in research? The American Journal of Bioethics, 10(9), 3–11. https://doi.org/10.1080/15265161.2010.494215.CrossRefPubMed

Shivayogi, P. (2013). Vulnerable population and methods for their safeguard. Perspectives in clinical research, 4(1), 53–57. https://doi.org/10.4103/2229-3485.106389.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Snow, J. (2012). The complete research suite: a step-by-step guide to using qualtrics. Nursing. https://www.nursing.upenn.edu/live/files/106-qualtrics-step-by-step-manualpdf.

Snowdon, C., Elbourne, D., & Garcia, J. (2006). “It was a snap decision”: parental and professional perspectives on the speed of decisions about participation in perinatal randomized controlled trials. Social Science & Medicine, 62(9), 2279–2290. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socscimed.2005.10.008.CrossRef

Tait, A. R., Voepel-Lewis, T., & Malviya, S. (2003). Participation of children in clinical research: factors that influence a parent’s decision to consent. Anesthesiology, 99(4), 819–825. https://doi.org/10.1097/00000542-200310000-00012.CrossRefPubMed

Tates, K., Elbers, E., Meeuwesen, L., & Bensing, J. (2002). Doctor–parent–child relationships: a “pas de trois,”. Patient Education and Counseling, 48(1), 5–14. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0738-3991(02)00093-9.CrossRefPubMed

Tereskerz, P. M. (2010). Data safety monitoring boards: legal and ethical considerations for research accountability. Accountability in Research, 17(1), 30–50. https://doi.org/10.1080/08989620903520313.CrossRefPubMed

Tsan, M. F. (2019). Measuring the quality and performance of institutional review boards. Journal of Empirical Research on Human Research Ethics, 14(3), 187–189. https://doi.org/10.1177/1556264618804686.CrossRefPubMed

Tsungmey, T., Kim, J. P., Dunn, L. B., Ryan, K., Lane-McKinley, K., & Roberts, L. W. (2020). Negative association of perceived risk and willingness to participate in innovative psychiatric research protocols. Journal of Psychiatric Research, 122, 9–16. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpsychires.2019.12.010.CrossRefPubMed

United Nations General Assembly (1989). Convention on the rights of the child. United Nations Treaty Series 1577: no. 3.

Vanhelst, J., Hardy, L., Bert, D., Duhem, S., Coopman, S., Libersa, C., Deplanque, D., Gottrand, F., & Béghin, L. (2013). Effect of child health status on parents’ allowing children to participate in pediatric research. BMC Medical Ethics, 14, 7 https://doi.org/10.1186/1472-6939-14-7.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Whitehead, J. (1999). On being the statistician on a data and safety monitoring board. Statistics in Medicine, 18(24), 3425–3434.CrossRef

Woodgate, R. L., & Yanofsky, R. A. (2010). Parents’ experiences in decision making with childhood cancer clinical trials. Cancer Nursing, 33(1), 11–18. https://doi.org/10.1097/NCC.0b013e3181b43389.CrossRefPubMed

World Health Organization (2015). Every woman every child: the global strategy for women’s, children’s, and adolescents’ health (2016–2030). https://www.who.int/life-course/partners/global-strategy/globalstrategyreport2016-2030-lowres.pdf.

World Health Organization (2020). Adolescent mental health. https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/adolescent-mental-health.

Titel: Maternal Perceptions of Safeguards for Research Involving Children
Auteurs: Maryam Rostami
Jane Paik Kim
Laura Turner-Essel
Laura Weiss Roberts
Publicatiedatum: 07-08-2021
Uitgeverij: Springer US
Gepubliceerd in: Journal of Child and Family Studies / Uitgave 5/2022
Print ISSN: 1062-1024
Elektronisch ISSN: 1573-2843
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10826-021-02037-8

Andere artikelen Uitgave 5/2022

Linkages between Interparental Conflicts and Adjustment of Adolescents in Hong Kong: The Mediating Role of Locus of Control

Original Paper

Bullying and Cyberbullying Offending Among US Youth: The Influence of Six Parenting Dimensions

Original Paper

Associations among African American Parents’ Beliefs, Involvement, and Measures of School Readiness

Original Paper

What Parents and Children Say When Talking about Children’s Gratitude: A Thematic Analysis

Original Paper

Believing in My Strength: Personal Best Goals as Mediators in Strength-Based Parenting and Adolescents’ Well-Being

Original Paper

Parental Psychological Control, Social Capital, Substance Use, and Driving Under the Influence among College Students: Sex Differences

Original Paper