Informed consent for genetic research

Aaron Hamvas, Katherine K. Madden, Lawrence Nogee, Michelle A. Trusgnich, Daniel J. Wegner, Hillary B. Heins, F. Sessions Cole

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

Background: Rapid technological advances in genetic research and public concern about genetic discrimination have led to anticipatory safeguards in the informed consent process in the absence of legal examples of proven discrimination. Despite federal and state regulations to restrict access to personal health information, including genetic information, institutional review boards have required the addition of language to informed consent documents that warns about the risks of discrimination with participation in genetic research. Objective: To determine the reasons that families refused consent for their infant's participation in a study evaluating a genetic cause of respiratory distress syndrome. Design: Survey conducted between February 1, 2002, and March 31, 2003. Setting: Academic, tertiary free-standing children's hospital. Participants: A convenience sample of 465 families were approached for consent. The 135 families who refused consent were surveyed. Main Outcome Measures: Reasons for refusal. Results: Of the nonconsenting families, 79% spontaneously and specifically identified institutionally required language in our consent form concerning the risk of denial of access to health insurance and employment as the primary reason for refusal; 97% indicated that their fears resulted directly from language in our consent form. Only 20% of families who refused consent cited inadequate time to consider the study. Conclusions: The institutionally required description of risk of genetic discrimination due solely to participation in genetic research was the primary reason for refusal to consent in this cohort. Information about federally and institutionally mandated protections for confidentiality of participants in genetic research should be included in the informed consent document to balance the description of hypothetical risks and more accurately inform subjects.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)551-555
Number of pages5
JournalArchives of Pediatrics and Adolescent Medicine
Volume158
Issue number6
DOIs
StatePublished - Jun 2004

Fingerprint

Genetic Research
Consent Forms
Informed Consent
Language
Personal Health Records
Research Ethics Committees
Confidentiality
Health Insurance
Fear
Outcome Assessment (Health Care)

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Pediatrics, Perinatology, and Child Health

Cite this

Hamvas, A., Madden, K. K., Nogee, L., Trusgnich, M. A., Wegner, D. J., Heins, H. B., & Cole, F. S. (2004). Informed consent for genetic research. Archives of Pediatrics and Adolescent Medicine, 158(6), 551-555. https://doi.org/10.1001/archpedi.158.6.551

Informed consent for genetic research. / Hamvas, Aaron; Madden, Katherine K.; Nogee, Lawrence; Trusgnich, Michelle A.; Wegner, Daniel J.; Heins, Hillary B.; Cole, F. Sessions.

In: Archives of Pediatrics and Adolescent Medicine, Vol. 158, No. 6, 06.2004, p. 551-555.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Hamvas, A, Madden, KK, Nogee, L, Trusgnich, MA, Wegner, DJ, Heins, HB & Cole, FS 2004, 'Informed consent for genetic research', Archives of Pediatrics and Adolescent Medicine, vol. 158, no. 6, pp. 551-555. https://doi.org/10.1001/archpedi.158.6.551
Hamvas A, Madden KK, Nogee L, Trusgnich MA, Wegner DJ, Heins HB et al. Informed consent for genetic research. Archives of Pediatrics and Adolescent Medicine. 2004 Jun;158(6):551-555. https://doi.org/10.1001/archpedi.158.6.551
Hamvas, Aaron ; Madden, Katherine K. ; Nogee, Lawrence ; Trusgnich, Michelle A. ; Wegner, Daniel J. ; Heins, Hillary B. ; Cole, F. Sessions. / Informed consent for genetic research. In: Archives of Pediatrics and Adolescent Medicine. 2004 ; Vol. 158, No. 6. pp. 551-555.
@article{3ddf917977624d9d83c4beeb66390742,
title = "Informed consent for genetic research",
abstract = "Background: Rapid technological advances in genetic research and public concern about genetic discrimination have led to anticipatory safeguards in the informed consent process in the absence of legal examples of proven discrimination. Despite federal and state regulations to restrict access to personal health information, including genetic information, institutional review boards have required the addition of language to informed consent documents that warns about the risks of discrimination with participation in genetic research. Objective: To determine the reasons that families refused consent for their infant's participation in a study evaluating a genetic cause of respiratory distress syndrome. Design: Survey conducted between February 1, 2002, and March 31, 2003. Setting: Academic, tertiary free-standing children's hospital. Participants: A convenience sample of 465 families were approached for consent. The 135 families who refused consent were surveyed. Main Outcome Measures: Reasons for refusal. Results: Of the nonconsenting families, 79{\%} spontaneously and specifically identified institutionally required language in our consent form concerning the risk of denial of access to health insurance and employment as the primary reason for refusal; 97{\%} indicated that their fears resulted directly from language in our consent form. Only 20{\%} of families who refused consent cited inadequate time to consider the study. Conclusions: The institutionally required description of risk of genetic discrimination due solely to participation in genetic research was the primary reason for refusal to consent in this cohort. Information about federally and institutionally mandated protections for confidentiality of participants in genetic research should be included in the informed consent document to balance the description of hypothetical risks and more accurately inform subjects.",
author = "Aaron Hamvas and Madden, {Katherine K.} and Lawrence Nogee and Trusgnich, {Michelle A.} and Wegner, {Daniel J.} and Heins, {Hillary B.} and Cole, {F. Sessions}",
year = "2004",
month = "6",
doi = "10.1001/archpedi.158.6.551",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "158",
pages = "551--555",
journal = "JAMA Pediatrics",
issn = "2168-6203",
publisher = "American Medical Association",
number = "6",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Informed consent for genetic research

AU - Hamvas, Aaron

AU - Madden, Katherine K.

AU - Nogee, Lawrence

AU - Trusgnich, Michelle A.

AU - Wegner, Daniel J.

AU - Heins, Hillary B.

AU - Cole, F. Sessions

PY - 2004/6

Y1 - 2004/6

N2 - Background: Rapid technological advances in genetic research and public concern about genetic discrimination have led to anticipatory safeguards in the informed consent process in the absence of legal examples of proven discrimination. Despite federal and state regulations to restrict access to personal health information, including genetic information, institutional review boards have required the addition of language to informed consent documents that warns about the risks of discrimination with participation in genetic research. Objective: To determine the reasons that families refused consent for their infant's participation in a study evaluating a genetic cause of respiratory distress syndrome. Design: Survey conducted between February 1, 2002, and March 31, 2003. Setting: Academic, tertiary free-standing children's hospital. Participants: A convenience sample of 465 families were approached for consent. The 135 families who refused consent were surveyed. Main Outcome Measures: Reasons for refusal. Results: Of the nonconsenting families, 79% spontaneously and specifically identified institutionally required language in our consent form concerning the risk of denial of access to health insurance and employment as the primary reason for refusal; 97% indicated that their fears resulted directly from language in our consent form. Only 20% of families who refused consent cited inadequate time to consider the study. Conclusions: The institutionally required description of risk of genetic discrimination due solely to participation in genetic research was the primary reason for refusal to consent in this cohort. Information about federally and institutionally mandated protections for confidentiality of participants in genetic research should be included in the informed consent document to balance the description of hypothetical risks and more accurately inform subjects.

AB - Background: Rapid technological advances in genetic research and public concern about genetic discrimination have led to anticipatory safeguards in the informed consent process in the absence of legal examples of proven discrimination. Despite federal and state regulations to restrict access to personal health information, including genetic information, institutional review boards have required the addition of language to informed consent documents that warns about the risks of discrimination with participation in genetic research. Objective: To determine the reasons that families refused consent for their infant's participation in a study evaluating a genetic cause of respiratory distress syndrome. Design: Survey conducted between February 1, 2002, and March 31, 2003. Setting: Academic, tertiary free-standing children's hospital. Participants: A convenience sample of 465 families were approached for consent. The 135 families who refused consent were surveyed. Main Outcome Measures: Reasons for refusal. Results: Of the nonconsenting families, 79% spontaneously and specifically identified institutionally required language in our consent form concerning the risk of denial of access to health insurance and employment as the primary reason for refusal; 97% indicated that their fears resulted directly from language in our consent form. Only 20% of families who refused consent cited inadequate time to consider the study. Conclusions: The institutionally required description of risk of genetic discrimination due solely to participation in genetic research was the primary reason for refusal to consent in this cohort. Information about federally and institutionally mandated protections for confidentiality of participants in genetic research should be included in the informed consent document to balance the description of hypothetical risks and more accurately inform subjects.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=2642528695&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=2642528695&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1001/archpedi.158.6.551

DO - 10.1001/archpedi.158.6.551

M3 - Article

C2 - 15184218

AN - SCOPUS:2642528695

VL - 158

SP - 551

EP - 555

JO - JAMA Pediatrics

JF - JAMA Pediatrics

SN - 2168-6203

IS - 6

ER -