Electronic consent in a COVID-19 vaccine implementation trial in South Africa: Participant perspectives

Author:

Nair GonasagrieORCID,Kabanda Siti M.,Jacobs-Alfred Meagan M.M.,Obasa Adetayo E.A.ORCID,McCaul Michael G.ORCID,Moodley KeymanthriORCID

Abstract

The COVID-19 pandemic has warranted modifications to clinical research implementation to ensure adherence to public health and safety measures. Often, this modification has necessitated a deviation from the traditional face-to-face approach to an electronic or hybrid consent process. We assessed the acceptability and preference for electronic consent and explored understanding of the electronic consent information – an outcome which is vital in providing reassurance that consent is provided with full appreciation of the risks and benefits of study participation. In this descriptive study, healthcare professionals (HCPs) were invited, through a database of HCP contacts, snowball sampling and advertisement, to participate in an online survey between 14 July 2021 and 17 September 2021, to explore their experiences of providing electronic consent for enrolment into the largest implementation trial of a COVID vaccine in South Africa (SISONKE Trial). Descriptive analysis was used to characterise respondents and categorical data were expressed as frequencies. The prevalence of recurring responses to open-ended questions allowed for the identification of themes. A total of 1025 HCPs completed the online survey. Access to a COVID-19 vaccine was the strongest motivating factor for enrolment (82.3%) into the SISONKE Trial. Over a third of participants (38.6%) were not able to discuss the study with research staff. While the majority of participants (85.2%) indicated that online consent was acceptable, it was recognised that acceptability was context specific. Although 64% indicated awareness that reporting both a positive COVID test and adverse events were requirements, a significant percentage (32%) did not recall that the reporting period was 2 years. The electronic consent process was easily navigated by educated HCPs with access to electronic devices and data. Vaccine access was the most important motivation for participation, thus raising questions about how voluntary the consent process was and the role of desperation in deciding to participate. Significance: Navigation of the electronic consent process for participation in a COVID-19 vaccine implementation trial is not a challenge for educated healthcare professionals with access to electronic devices and data. However, technical skills and access to technology may impact the integrity of the informed consent process for lay research participants. Motivation to join research studies for access to scarce resources impacts negatively on the authenticity of the consent processes, as participation may be informed but not truly voluntary, and is an issue that ethics committees and researchers should address.

Funder

Universiteit Stellenbosch

Publisher

Academy of Science of South Africa

Subject

General Earth and Planetary Sciences,General Agricultural and Biological Sciences,General Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology

Reference30 articles.

1. 1. McDermott MM, Newman AB. Remote research and clinical trial integrity during and after the coronavirus pandemic. JAMA. 2021;325(19):1935. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2021.4609

2. 2. South African Department of Health. South African good clinical practice guidelines. 3rd ed. Pretoria: Department of Health; 2020. Available from: https://www.sahpra.org.za/wp-content/uploads/2021/06/SA-GCP-2020_ Final.pdf

3. 3. US Department of Health and Human Services. CFR - Code of Federal Regulations Title 21: CFR 50.27 [document on the Internet]. c2016 [cited 2021 Jun 15]. Available from: https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/scripts/cdrh/ cfdocs/cfcfr/cfrsearch.cfm?fr=50.27

4. 4. Jefford MMR. Improvement of informed consent and the quality of consent documents. Lancet Oncol. 2008;9(5):485-493. https://doi.org/10.1016/ S1470-2045(08)70128-1

5. 5. Wendler D. What should be disclosed to research participants? Am J Bioeth. 2013;13(12):3-8. https://doi.org/10.1080/15265161.2013.851578

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