Abstract
Information is usually supposed to be a prerequisite for people making decisions on whether or not to participate in a clinical trial. Previously conducted studies and research ethics scandals indicate that participants have sometimes lacked important pieces of information. Over the past few decades the quantity of information believed to be adequate has increased significantly, and in some instances a new maxim seems to be in place: the more information, the better the ethics in terms of respecting a participant's autonomy. The authors hypothesise that the dose-response curve from pharmacology or toxicology serves as a model to illustrate that a large amount of written information does not equal optimality. Using the curve as a pedagogical analogy when teaching ethics to students in clinical sciences, and also in engaging in dialogue with research institutions, may promote reflection on how to adjust information in relation to the preferences of individual participants, thereby transgressing the maxim that more information means better ethics.
Full Text
The Full Text of this article is available as a PDF (52.4 KB).
Selected References
These references are in PubMed. This may not be the complete list of references from this article.
- Beecher H. K. Ethics and clinical research. N Engl J Med. 1966 Jun 16;274(24):1354–1360. doi: 10.1056/NEJM196606162742405. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Dresden G. M., Levitt M. A. Modifying a standard industry clinical trial consent form improves patient information retention as part of the informed consent process. Acad Emerg Med. 2001 Mar;8(3):246–252. doi: 10.1111/j.1553-2712.2001.tb01300.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Hoeyer Klaus. 'Science is really needed--that's all I know': informed consent and the non-verbal practices of collecting blood for genetic research in northern Sweden. New Genet Soc. 2003 Dec;22(3):229–244. doi: 10.1080/1463677032000147199. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Hoeyer Klaus, Olofsson Bert-Ove, Mjörndal Tom, Lynöe Niels. The ethics of research using biobanks: reason to question the importance attributed to informed consent. Arch Intern Med. 2005 Jan 10;165(1):97–100. doi: 10.1001/archinte.165.1.97. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Lynöe N., Sandlund M., Dahlqvist G., Jacobsson L. Informed consent: study of quality of information given to participants in a clinical trial. BMJ. 1991 Sep 14;303(6803):610–613. doi: 10.1136/bmj.303.6803.610. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Lynöe Niels, Boman Karin, Andersson Håkan, Sandlund Mikael. Informed consent and participants' inclination to delegate decision-making to the doctor. Acta Oncol. 2004;43(8):769–769. doi: 10.1080/02841860410002734. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Lynöe Niels, Näsström Birgit, Sandlund Mikael. Study of the quality of information given to patients participating in a clinical trial regarding chronic hemodialysis. Scand J Urol Nephrol. 2004;38(6):517–520. doi: 10.1080/00365590410033362. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Madsen S. M., Holm S., Riis P. The extent of written trial information: preferences among potential and actual trial subjects. Bull Med Ethics. 2000 Jun;(159):13–18. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Newton-Howes P. A., Bedford N. D., Dobbs B. R., Frizelle F. A. Informed consent: what do patients want to know? N Z Med J. 1998 Sep 11;111(1073):340–342. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Tattersall M. H. Examining informed consent to cancer clinical trials. Lancet. 2001 Nov 24;358(9295):1742–1743. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(01)06838-6. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]