Decision making for participation in dementia research

Betty E Black, Malory Wechsler, Linda Fogarty

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

Objectives: This study examined the decision-making process used by individuals asked to participate in dementia research and their opinions on how future proxy research decisions would or should be made, including participants' preferred ethical standards for decision making. Design: Cross-sectional qualitative methods. Setting: University research institutions. Participants: Informants were 39 of 46 individuals with cognitive impairment (i.e., subjects) who were asked to join one of six dementia studies and 46 study partners or surrogate decision makers. Measurements: Semistructured individual interviews were audio recorded and transcribed for content analysis. Results: Within dyads, subjects and surrogates often differed in their perspectives on how decisions were made regarding whether to join a study, and no single method was identified as a predominant approach. Although there was only fair agreement within dyads on who ultimately made the decision, subjects and surrogates most often said it was the subject. For future proxy research decisions, subjects and surrogates most often preferred the ethical standard of best interests and least often favored substituted judgment. However, many participants preferred a combination of best interests and substituted judgment or a more complex approach that also considers the interests of others. Conclusions: Individuals with mild to moderate cognitive impairment can and do engage to some extent in the decision-making process for dementia research and can discuss their opinions on how they would want such decisions made for them in the future. These findings support the recommended approach for obtaining proxy consent and subject assent if the individual lacks consent capacity.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)355-363
Number of pages9
JournalAmerican Journal of Geriatric Psychiatry
Volume21
Issue number4
DOIs
StatePublished - Apr 2013

Fingerprint

Dementia
Decision Making
Proxy
Research
Interviews
Cognitive Dysfunction

Keywords

  • Clinical research
  • Decision making
  • Dementia
  • Qualitative research

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Psychiatry and Mental health
  • Geriatrics and Gerontology

Cite this

Decision making for participation in dementia research. / Black, Betty E; Wechsler, Malory; Fogarty, Linda.

In: American Journal of Geriatric Psychiatry, Vol. 21, No. 4, 04.2013, p. 355-363.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Black, Betty E ; Wechsler, Malory ; Fogarty, Linda. / Decision making for participation in dementia research. In: American Journal of Geriatric Psychiatry. 2013 ; Vol. 21, No. 4. pp. 355-363.
@article{a24a54575aa44b88a4608989e9509c1d,
title = "Decision making for participation in dementia research",
abstract = "Objectives: This study examined the decision-making process used by individuals asked to participate in dementia research and their opinions on how future proxy research decisions would or should be made, including participants' preferred ethical standards for decision making. Design: Cross-sectional qualitative methods. Setting: University research institutions. Participants: Informants were 39 of 46 individuals with cognitive impairment (i.e., subjects) who were asked to join one of six dementia studies and 46 study partners or surrogate decision makers. Measurements: Semistructured individual interviews were audio recorded and transcribed for content analysis. Results: Within dyads, subjects and surrogates often differed in their perspectives on how decisions were made regarding whether to join a study, and no single method was identified as a predominant approach. Although there was only fair agreement within dyads on who ultimately made the decision, subjects and surrogates most often said it was the subject. For future proxy research decisions, subjects and surrogates most often preferred the ethical standard of best interests and least often favored substituted judgment. However, many participants preferred a combination of best interests and substituted judgment or a more complex approach that also considers the interests of others. Conclusions: Individuals with mild to moderate cognitive impairment can and do engage to some extent in the decision-making process for dementia research and can discuss their opinions on how they would want such decisions made for them in the future. These findings support the recommended approach for obtaining proxy consent and subject assent if the individual lacks consent capacity.",
keywords = "Clinical research, Decision making, Dementia, Qualitative research",
author = "Black, {Betty E} and Malory Wechsler and Linda Fogarty",
year = "2013",
month = "4",
doi = "10.1016/j.jagp.2012.11.009",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "21",
pages = "355--363",
journal = "American Journal of Geriatric Psychiatry",
issn = "1064-7481",
publisher = "Lippincott Williams and Wilkins",
number = "4",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Decision making for participation in dementia research

AU - Black, Betty E

AU - Wechsler, Malory

AU - Fogarty, Linda

PY - 2013/4

Y1 - 2013/4

N2 - Objectives: This study examined the decision-making process used by individuals asked to participate in dementia research and their opinions on how future proxy research decisions would or should be made, including participants' preferred ethical standards for decision making. Design: Cross-sectional qualitative methods. Setting: University research institutions. Participants: Informants were 39 of 46 individuals with cognitive impairment (i.e., subjects) who were asked to join one of six dementia studies and 46 study partners or surrogate decision makers. Measurements: Semistructured individual interviews were audio recorded and transcribed for content analysis. Results: Within dyads, subjects and surrogates often differed in their perspectives on how decisions were made regarding whether to join a study, and no single method was identified as a predominant approach. Although there was only fair agreement within dyads on who ultimately made the decision, subjects and surrogates most often said it was the subject. For future proxy research decisions, subjects and surrogates most often preferred the ethical standard of best interests and least often favored substituted judgment. However, many participants preferred a combination of best interests and substituted judgment or a more complex approach that also considers the interests of others. Conclusions: Individuals with mild to moderate cognitive impairment can and do engage to some extent in the decision-making process for dementia research and can discuss their opinions on how they would want such decisions made for them in the future. These findings support the recommended approach for obtaining proxy consent and subject assent if the individual lacks consent capacity.

AB - Objectives: This study examined the decision-making process used by individuals asked to participate in dementia research and their opinions on how future proxy research decisions would or should be made, including participants' preferred ethical standards for decision making. Design: Cross-sectional qualitative methods. Setting: University research institutions. Participants: Informants were 39 of 46 individuals with cognitive impairment (i.e., subjects) who were asked to join one of six dementia studies and 46 study partners or surrogate decision makers. Measurements: Semistructured individual interviews were audio recorded and transcribed for content analysis. Results: Within dyads, subjects and surrogates often differed in their perspectives on how decisions were made regarding whether to join a study, and no single method was identified as a predominant approach. Although there was only fair agreement within dyads on who ultimately made the decision, subjects and surrogates most often said it was the subject. For future proxy research decisions, subjects and surrogates most often preferred the ethical standard of best interests and least often favored substituted judgment. However, many participants preferred a combination of best interests and substituted judgment or a more complex approach that also considers the interests of others. Conclusions: Individuals with mild to moderate cognitive impairment can and do engage to some extent in the decision-making process for dementia research and can discuss their opinions on how they would want such decisions made for them in the future. These findings support the recommended approach for obtaining proxy consent and subject assent if the individual lacks consent capacity.

KW - Clinical research

KW - Decision making

KW - Dementia

KW - Qualitative research

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84880112453&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84880112453&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.jagp.2012.11.009

DO - 10.1016/j.jagp.2012.11.009

M3 - Article

C2 - 23498382

AN - SCOPUS:84880112453

VL - 21

SP - 355

EP - 363

JO - American Journal of Geriatric Psychiatry

JF - American Journal of Geriatric Psychiatry

SN - 1064-7481

IS - 4

ER -