Abstract
Objective
There is a variability regarding timing of consent and personnel used in patient recruitment for neonatal research. We explored the associations between the study personnel and timing of consent with parents’ decisional conflict and ultimately their decision to enroll.
Study design
This was a multi-site, cross-sectional survey conducted between August 2015 and October 2017. Participants were parents approached to enroll their 24–28-week infant in a clinical trial. Parents completed an interviewer-administered 61-item questionnaire.
Results
Overall, 163 surveys were completed; 105 by parents of enrolled infants and 58 by parents of non-enrolled infants (54.5% participation rate). Neither the individual requesting nor timing of consent was associated with parents’ knowledge score, decisional conflict, or decision to enroll. Parents preferred to be approached prenatally and by their infant’s doctor.
Conclusion
Study designers and IRBs may allow flexibility in personnel and timing of consent as it is respectful of parents and may enhance trial enrollment.
This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution
Access options
Subscribe to this journal
Receive 12 print issues and online access
$259.00 per year
only $21.58 per issue
Rent or buy this article
Prices vary by article type
from$1.95
to$39.95
Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Roth-Cline M, Nelson RM. Parental permission and child assent in research on children. Yale J Biol Med. 2013;86:291–301.
U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. 2009. 45 CFR 46, subparts A and B. http://www.hhs.gov/ohrp/humansubjects/guidance/45cfr46.html. Accessed 30 Oct 2016.
Katz AL, Webb SA. AAP Committee on Bioethics. Informed consent in decision-making in pediatric practice. Pediatrics. 2016;138:e20161485.
Laventhal N, Tarini B, Lantos J. Ethical issues in neonatal and pediatric clinical trials. Pediatr Clin North Am. 2012;59:1205–20.
Mason SA, Allmark PJ. Obtaining informed consent to neonatal randomised controlled trials: interviews with parents and clinicians in the Euricon study. Lancet. 2000;356:2045–51.
Singhal N, Oberle K, Burgess E, Huber-Okrainec J. Parents’ perceptions of research with newborns. J Perinatol. 2003;22:57–63.
Juul SE, Mayock D, Comstock B, Heagerty P. Neuroprotective potential of erythropoeitin in neonates; design of a randomized trial. Matern Health Neonatol Perinatol. 2015;1:27.
O’Connor AM. Validation of a decisional conflict scale. Med Decis Mak. 1995;15:25–30.
O’Connor AM. User manual—decisional conflict scale (16 item statement format). Ottawa: Ottawa Hospital Research Institute; 1993 (updated 2010).
Office for Human Research Protection. Protecting human research subjects: institutional review board guidebook. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office; 1993. https://archive.hhs.gov/ohrp/irb/irb_guidebook.htm. Accessed 17 Sept 2017.
Hoberman A, Shaikh N, Bhatnagar S. Factors that influence parental decisions to participate in clinical research. JAMA Pediatr. 2013;167:561–56.
Tait AR, Voepel-Lewis T, Malviya S. Factors that influence parents’ assessments of the risks and benefits of research involving their children. Pediatrics. 2004;113:727–32.
Van Belle G, Fisher L. Biostatistics: a methodology for the health sciences. 2nd ed. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons; 2004.
StataCorp. Stata statistical software: release 14. College Station, TX: StataCorp LP; 2015.
National Institutes of Health (NIH). Final NIH Policy on the Use of a Single Institutional Review Board for Multi-Site Research. 2016. https://grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/notice-files/NOT-OD-16-094.html. Accessed 28 May 2017.
Whitney SN. The Python’s embrace: clinical research regulation by institutional review boards. Pediatrics. 2012;129:576–8.
Eisenberg L. Research involving premature infants: timing is everything. Am J Bioeth. 2015;15:79–80.
Ghia N, Spong CY, Starbuck VN, Scialli AR, Ghidini A. Magnesium sulfate therapy affects attention and working memory in patients undergoing preterm labor. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2000;183:940–4.
Rich WD, Auten KJ, Gantz MG, Hale EC, Hensman AM, Newman NS, Finer NN. Antenatal consent in the SUPPORT trial: challenges, costs, and representative enrollment. Pediatrics. 2010;126:e215–21.
Ballard H, Shook L, Desai N, Anand KJS. Neonatal research and the validity of informed consent obtained in the perinatal period. J Perinatol. 2004;24:409–15.
Fiore R, Cushman R. Informed consent and parental permission for research: rules, roles, and relationships. Am J Bioeth. 2015;15:77–8.
Appelbaum PS, Roth LH, Lidz C. The therapeutic misconception: informed consent in psychiatric research. Int J Law Psychiatry. 1982;5:319–29.
Shah A, Porter K, Juul SE, Wilfond B. Precluding consent by clinicians who are both the attending and the investigator: an outdated shibboleth? Am J Bioeth. 2015;15:80–2.
Burgess E, Singhal N, Amin H. Consent for clinical research in the neonatal intensive care unit: a retrospective survey and a prospective study. Arch Dis Child Fetal Neonatal Ed. 2003;88:F321–3.
Zupancic JA, Gillie P, Streiner DL, Watts JD, Schmidt B. Determinants of parental authorization for involvement of newborn infants in clinical trials. Pediatrics. 1997;99:E6.
Murray E, Davis H, Tai SS, Coulter A, Gray A, Haines A. Randomised controlled trial of an interactive multimedia decision aid on hormone replacement therapy in primary care. BMJ. 2001;323:490–3.
Murray E, Davis H, Tai SS, Coulter A, Gray A, Haines A. Randomised controlled trial of an interactive multimedia decision aid on benign prostatic hypertrophy in primary care. BMJ. 2001;323:493–6.
Acknowledgements
We wish to thank the research coordinators and bedside nurses involved in the PENUT Trial as well as this study. We wish to acknowledge US taxpayers for providing the funding to support the National Institutes of Health and the PENUT study. We are indebted to the parents for their willingness to participate.
PENUT Neonatal Informed Consent Working Group
Bonnie Arzuaga, Catherine L. Baker, Sandra Beauma, Tiffany Brown, Rita Daly, Melanie Drummond, Natalie Dweck, Ariana Franco, Clare Giblin, Pamela Hedrick, Jordan Kase, Janine Khan, Kristi Lanier, Melanie Mason, Jana McConnell, Deborah Ott, Palak Patel, Patricia Robinson, Molly Schau, Vivek Vijayamandhavan, Tiglath Ziyeh.
Author contributions
ARS conceptualized and designed the study, designed data collection instruments, coordinated data collection, collected data, drafted the initial manuscript, and reviewed and revised the manuscript. BSW and SJ conceptualized and designed the study, designed data collection instruments, drafted the initial manuscript, and reviewed and revised the manuscript. DW conceptualized and designed the study, designed data collection instruments, and reviewed and revised the manuscript. AS was the project coordinator, conceptualized and designed the study, designed data collection instruments, coordinated and supervised data collection, and collected data and reviewed the manuscript. KH and PH carried out the data analyses, and reviewed and revised the manuscript. SG helped refine the data collection instrument, collected data, coordinated and supervised data collection, and reviewed and revised the manuscript. SC helped design the study and data collection instruments, collected data, and reviewed the manuscript. KAA, CEB, IDF, CK, and RKO helped refine the data collection instrument, coordinated and supervised data collection, and reviewed and revised the manuscript. All authors approved the final manuscript as submitted and agree to be accountable for all aspects of the work. We also wish to thank the members of the PENUT Neonatal Informed Consent Working Group for their time and contributions to this research.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Consortia
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
Electronic supplementary material
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Shah, A.R., Wilfond, B.S., Silvia, A. et al. Informed consent for a neonatal clinical trial: parental experiences and perspectives. J Perinatol 38, 865–872 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41372-018-0119-6
Received:
Revised:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41372-018-0119-6
This article is cited by
-
Experiences and preferences for learning about neonatal research: insights from parent interviews
Journal of Perinatology (2024)