ArticleJournal of cross-cultural gerontology2008
Substitute consent for research involving the elderly: a comparison between Quebec and France.
Article in Journal of cross-cultural gerontology, 2008. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Pooled it
- Informed consent in dental care and research for the older adult population: A systematic review.Journal of the American Dental Association (1939) · 2017Pooled it
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The authors first describe the rules enacted in Quebec and France to protect adults with decisional impairment who may be approached by investigators to participate in research protocols. They then present two consecutive postal surveys conducted among Quebec and French researchers in aging and designed to (1) assess their knowledge of the legal provisions implemented to protect decisionally incapable adults, (2) elicit their opinions regarding the person best suited to provide substitute consent for research participation, and (3) document their conduct related to obtaining consent for prospective subjects with impaired decisional capacity. Knowledge of the legislation governing substitute consent was poor, even more so among French than Quebec researchers (p < 0.001). In both samples, the majority of respondents felt that the substitute decision-maker does not have to be legally appointed when the study poses little risk to the participant. Practice data revealed a certain discrepancy between the conduct of researchers in aging and the legal provisions regarding consent for research purposes that prevail in their jurisdictions. These findings underscore the need to better educate clinical investigators about existing measures to protect prospective subjects who lack decisional capacity. They also provide some support for allowing close relatives to consent to research participation on behalf of older adults who are unable to consent by themselves and have not been appointed a legal representative.
Indexed as
Identifiers
18493845What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.