Demonstrating ‘respect for persons’ in clinical research: findings from qualitative interviews with diverse genomics research participants

Author:

Kraft Stephanie AORCID,Rothwell Erin,Shah Seema K,Duenas Devan M,Lewis Hannah,Muessig Kristin,Opel Douglas J,Goddard Katrina A B,Wilfond Benjamin S

Abstract

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.

Funder

National Human Genome Research Institute

Center for Clinical and Translational Research, Seattle Children's Research Institute

Publisher

BMJ

Subject

Health Policy,Arts and Humanities (miscellaneous),Issues, ethics and legal aspects,Health (social science)

Reference42 articles.

1. National Commission for the Protection of Human Subjects of Biomedical and Behavioral Research . The Belmont report: ethical principles and guidelines for the protection of human subjects of research. Bethesda, MD: The Commission, 1978.

2. Beauchamp T , Childress J . Principles of biomedical ethics. 6th ed. Oxford, England: Oxford University Press 1979, 2008.

3. Respect: Or, How Respect for Persons Became Respect for Autonomy

4. Conceptualizing trust in community-academic research partnerships using concept mapping approach: a multi-CTSA study;Dave;Eval Program Plann,2018

5. Person-oriented research ethics: integrating relational and everyday ethics in research;Cascio;Account Res,2018

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3