"Choice of law" in precision medicine research.

Large-scale precision medicine research requires massive amounts of data representing people from all walks of life; thus, in the US, it is often multistate research. Significant legal and ethical quandaries arise as a result of the patchwork of laws states have enacted that may apply to research, are not preempted by federal law, and may impose requirements or provide participant rights and protections that differ from other states. Determining which state's laws apply, and under what circumstances, is not solved by the transition to a single-IRB model and researchers cannot simply choose one state's laws to apply uniformly. At a minimum, the current process of meeting each state's requirements could be made more reliable and efficient. To fundamentally change this status quo, however, requires action at multiple levels. Federally, well-known gaps in the Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act should be closed, and a coherent system of compensation for research injury-including non-physical injuries-should be developed. States should clarify which of their laws are intended to apply to research and work collaboratively to harmonize them. At the level of individual research projects, numerous policies and procedures could be standardized through authoritative guidelines. Examples include clarifying the scope of broad consent, understanding and upholding Certificates of Confidentiality, offering individual research results responsibly, and consistently disseminating aggregate results to participants and the public. Overall, development of a choice of law framework specific to the research context could significantly promote clarity and consistency.

The Ottawa Statement implementation guidance document for cluster randomized trials in the hemodialysis setting.

Research teams are increasingly interested in using cluster randomized trial (CRT) designs to generate practice-guiding evidence for in-center maintenance hemodialysis. However, CRTs raise complex ethical issues. The Ottawa Statement on the Ethical Design and Conduct of Cluster Randomized Trials, published in 2012, provides 15 recommendations to address ethical issues arising within 7 domains: justifying the CRT design, research ethics committee review, identifying research participants, obtaining informed consent, gatekeepers, assessing benefits and harms, and protecting vulnerable participants. But applying the Ottawa Statement recommendations to CRTs in the hemodialysis setting is complicated by the unique features of the setting and population. Here, with the help of content experts and patient partners, we co-developed this implementation guidance document to provide research teams, research ethics committees, and other stakeholders with detailed guidance on how to apply the Ottawa Statement recommendations to CRTs in the hemodialysis setting, the result of a 4-year research project. Thus, our work demonstrates how the voices of patients, caregivers, and all stakeholders may be included in the development of research ethics guidance.

Tips for Testing Adults With Suspected Genetic Kidney Disease.

Genetic kidney disease is common but often unrecognized. It accounts for most cystic kidney diseases and tubulopathies, many forms of congenital abnormalities of the kidney and urinary tract (CAKUT), and some glomerulopathies. Genetic kidney disease is typically suspected where the disease usually has a genetic basis or there is another affected family member, a young age at onset, or extrarenal involvement, but there are also many exceptions to these "rules". Genetic testing requires the patient's written informed consent. When a patient declines testing, another later conversation may be worthwhile. Genetic testing not only indicates the diagnosis but also the inheritance pattern, likely at-risk family members, disease in other organs, clinical course, and possibly effective treatments. Sometimes genetic testing does not identify a pathogenic variant even where other evidence is strong. A variant of uncertain significance (VUS) may be reported but should not be used for clinical decision making. It may be reclassified after more information becomes available without necessarily retesting the patient. Patients should be provided with a copy of their genetic test report, the results explained, and at-risk family members offered "cascade" testing. A referral to a clinical geneticist or genetic counselor helps identify affected family members and in providing advice to assist with reproductive decisions.

Mother, father, son and the Italian Law 40/2004. No 'delete' key.

Assisted reproductive technology (ART) has emerged in recent years as a point of significant innovation in the medical field but is also controversial from a bioethical and legal standpoint. In the Italian context, this matter is regulated by Law 40/2004, which specifically requires that informed consent should be obtained from both members of a couple before proceeding with any ART procedure. This consent is deemed irrevocable at the moment of egg fertilization. Recently, a ruling by the Italian Constitutional Court on this matter elicited controversy. The decision permitted embryo transfer even in a case of parental separation, notwithstanding the father's explicit opposition. The Court emphasized the priority of the woman's psychophysical health over the man's, highlighting the traumatic consequences of interrupting the undertaken path. As a result, both the man's right to self-determination regarding the decision to become a father and the need for informed consent at every stage of medical procedures have been downplayed. Moreover, the extensive utilization of procedures like embryo cryopreservation, with associated parental implications, particularly concerning the time frame and the actuality of informed consent, is posing challenges to the initial application framework of Law 40/2004. The objective of this Commentary is to scrutinize and discuss the issues mentioned above.

The ethics of induction of labor at 39 weeks in low-risk nulliparas in research and clinical practice.

The "A Randomized Trial of Induction Versus Expectant Management" trial (ARRIVE trial) published in 2018 suggested that induction of labor can be considered a "reasonable option" for low-risk nulliparous women at ≥39 weeks of gestation. The study results led some professional societies to endorse the option for elective induction of labor at 39 weeks of gestation in low-risk nulliparas, and this has begun to change obstetrical practice. The ARRIVE trial provided valuable information supporting the benefits of induction of labor; however, the trial is insufficient to serve as the primary justification for widespread elective induction of labor at 39 weeks of gestation in low-risk nulliparas because of concerns about external validity. Thus, the French ARRIVE trial was designed to test the hypothesis in a different setting that elective induction of labor at 39 weeks of gestation in low-risk nulliparas leads to a lower cesarean delivery rate than expectant management. This ongoing trial has been criticized as "pseudoscientific" and telling "women where, when, and how to give birth." We reject these allegations and extensively examine the ethical framework that should govern clinical and research interventions, including elective induction of labor at 39 weeks of gestation in low-risk nulliparas. This study aimed to discuss the ethical issues that emerge from randomized trials of elective induction of labor at 39 weeks of gestation in low-risk nulliparas and the ethics of the clinical practice itself. The analysis of existing evidence shows the importance of further research on induction of labor at 39 weeks of gestation in low-risk women. Certain aspects of research ethics in this area, particularly the consent of pregnant women in a context where autonomy remains fragile, call for vigilance. In addition, we emphasize that childbirth is not only a medical object but also a social phenomenon that cannot be regarded only from the perspective of a health risk to be managed by clinical research. Further research on this issue is needed to allow pregnant women to make informed decisions, and the results should be integrated with social issues. The perspective of women is required in constructing, evaluating, and implementing medical interventions in childbirth, such as induction of labor at 39 weeks of gestation.

Close contacts of xenograft recipients: Ethical considerations due to risk of xenozoonosis.

With decades of pre-clinical studies culminating in the recent clinical application of xenotransplantation, it would appear timely to provide recommendations for operationalizing oversight of xenotransplantation clinical trials. Ethical issues with clinical xenotransplantation have been described for decades, largely centering on animal welfare, the risks posed to the recipient, and public health risks posed by potential spread of xenozoonosis. Much less attention has been given to considerations relating to potentially elevated risks faced by those who may care for or otherwise have close contact with xenograft recipients. This paper examines the ethical and logistical issues raised by the potential exposure to xenozoonotic disease faced by close contacts of xenotransplant recipients-defined herein as including but not limited to caregivers, household contacts, and sexual partners-which warrants special attention given their increased risk of exposure to infection compared to the general public. We discuss implications of assent or consent by these close contacts to potentially undergo, along with the recipient, procedures for infection screening and possible quarantine. We then propose several options and recommendations for operationalizing oversight of xenotransplantation clinical trials that could account for and address close contacts' education on and agency regarding the risk of xenozoonosis.

Assessing the Readability of Clinical Trial Consent Forms for Surgical Specialties.

INTRODUCTION: To evaluate the readability of surgical clinical trial consent forms and compare readability across surgical specialties. METHODS: We conducted a cross-sectional analysis of surgical clinical trial consent forms available on ClinicalTrials.gov to quantitatively evaluate readability, word count, and length variations among different specialties. The analysis was performed between November 2022 and January 2023. A total of 386 surgical clinical trial consent forms across 14 surgical specialties were included. RESULTS: The main outcomes were language complexity (measured using Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level), number of words (measured as word count), time to read (measured at reading speeds of 240 per min), and readability (measured by Flesch Reading Ease Score, Gunning Frog Index, Simple Measures of Gobbledygook Index, FORCAST, and Automated Readability Index). The surgical consent forms were a mean (standard deviation) of 2626 (1668) words long, with a mean of 12:53 min to read at 240 words per min. None of the surgical specialties had an average readability level of sixth grade or lower across all six indices, and only 16 out of 386 (4%) clinical trials met the recommended reading level. Furthermore, there was no significant difference in reading grade level between surgical specialties based on the Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level and Flesch Reading Ease indices. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings suggest that current surgical clinical trial consent documents are too long and complex, exceeding the recommended sixth-grade reading level. Ensuring readable clinical trial consent forms is not only ethically responsible but also crucial for protecting patients' rights and well-being by facilitating informed decision-making.

Do patients actually understand? An evaluation of the informed consent process for endoscopic procedures in rural Uganda.

INTRODUCTION: Improving surgical access in low- and middle-income countries is vital for the 5 billion people who lack safe surgical care. Tailoring a culturally sensitive approach to consent is essential for patient comprehension and comfort, thereby alleviating the effects of resource constraints and advancing equitable care. This study examines the consenting process for endoscopy at Kyabirwa Surgical Center in Kyabirwa, Jinja, Uganda, to assess patients' knowledge and attitudes as a potential barrier to participating in endoscopic procedures. METHODS: All adult upper endoscopy (EGD) and colonoscopy patients were recruited to participate in a survey of their demographics, knowledge, and attitudes toward their procedure. All patients received a standard consultation explaining the procedure and its risks and benefits. RESULTS: 75 patients were included; median age was 54 years and 56% (n = 42) were women. 92% (n = 69) of patients had never had an endoscopy before and 73% (n = 55) of patients were scheduled for an EGD while the remaining 27% (n = 20) were scheduled for a colonoscopy. Most patients 80% (n = 60) had a basic understanding of what an endoscopy is and 87% (n = 65) its diagnostic purpose. Few patients 15% (n = 11) knew of the most common side effects or if they would have a surgical scar 27% (n = 20). Overall, 46.7% (n = 35) of patients were moderately or severely fearful of getting an endoscopy. Additionally, 45.3% (n = 34) of patients were moderately or severely fearful of receiving anesthesia during their endoscopic procedure. Despite this fear, most patients 85.3% (n = 64) stated that they understood the benefits of the procedure either very well or extremely well. CONCLUSIONS: Most patients understood the role that an endoscopic procedure plays in their care and its potential benefits. Despite this, many patients continued to have high levels of fear associated with both the endoscopic procedure and with receiving anesthesia during their procedure. Future patient education should focus on addressing patients' fears and the risks of undergoing an endoscopy, which may improve the utilization of surgical services.

Optimizing the consent process for emergent laparoscopic cholecystectomy using an interactive digital education platform: a randomized control trial.

BACKGROUND: Informed consent is essential for any surgery. The use of digital education platforms (DEPs) can enhance patient understanding of the consent discussion and is a method to standardize the consent process in elective, ambulatory settings. The use of DEP as an adjunct to standard verbal consent (SVC) has not been studied in an acute care setting. METHODS: We conducted a prospective randomized control trial with patients presenting to the emergency department of a tertiary care hospital with acute biliary pathology requiring a laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) between August 2021 and April 2023. Participants were randomized 1:1 to receive either a DEP module with SVC or SVC alone. Baseline procedure-specific knowledge and self-reported understanding of risks and benefits of LC were collected using a questionnaire. Primary outcome was immediate post-intervention knowledge assessed using a 21-question multiple choice questionnaire. Secondary outcomes were delayed procedure-specific knowledge and participants' satisfaction with the consent discussion. RESULTS: We recruited 79 participants and randomized them 1:1 into the intervention group (DEP + SVC, n = 40) and the control group (SVC, n = 39). Baseline demographics and baseline procedure-specific knowledge were similar between groups. The immediate post-intervention knowledge was significantly higher for participants in the intervention versus the control group with a Cohen's d effect size of 0.68 (85.2(10.6)% vs. 78.2(9.9)%; p = 0.004). Similarly, self-reported understanding of risks and benefits of LC was significantly greater for participants in the intervention versus the control group with a Cohen's effect size of 0.76 (68.5(16.4)% vs. 55.1(18.8)%; p = 0.001). For participants who completed the delayed post-intervention assessment (n = 29), there continued to be significantly higher retention of acquired knowledge in the intervention group with a Cohen's effect size of 0.61 (86.5(8.5)% vs. 79.8 (13.1)%; p = 0.024). There was no difference in participants' self-reported satisfaction with the consent discussion between groups (69.5(6.7)% vs. 67.2(7.7)%; p = 0.149). CONCLUSION: The addition of digital education platform to standard verbal consent significantly improves patient's early and delayed understanding of risks and benefits of LC in an acute care setting.

Aids to improve understanding of statistical risk in patients consenting for surgery and interventional procedures: A systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Informed consent is an essential process in clinical decision-making, through which healthcare providers educate patients about benefits, risks, and alternatives of a procedure. Statistical risk information is difficult to communicate and the effectiveness of aids aimed at supporting this type of communication is uncertain. This systematic review aims to study the impact of risk communication adjuncts on patients' understanding of statistical risk in surgery and interventional procedures. METHODS: A systematic search was performed across Medline, Embase, PsycINFO, Scopus, and Web of Science until July 2021 with a repeated search in September 2022. RCTs and observational studies examining risk communication tools (e.g., information leaflets and audio-video) in adult (age >16) patients undergoing a surgical or interventional procedure were included. Primary outcomes included the objective assessment of statistical risk recall. Secondary outcomes included patient attitudes with respect to statistical information. Due to the study heterogeneity, a narrative synthesis was performed. RESULTS: A total of 4348 articles were identified, and following abstract and full-text screening 14 articles, including 9 RCTs, were included. The total number of adult patients was 1513. The most common risk communication tool used was written information (n = 7). Most RCTs (7/9, 77.8%) showed statistically significant improvements in patient understanding of statistical risk in the intervention group. Quality assessment found some concerns with all RCTs. CONCLUSION: Risk communication tools appear to improve recall of statistical risk. Additional prospective trials comparing various aids simultaneously are warranted to determine the most effective method of improving understanding.

Individualized clinical decisions within standard-of-care pragmatic clinical trials: Implications for consent.

Pragmatic clinical trials of standard-of-care interventions compare the relative merits of medical treatments already in use. Traditional research informed consent processes pose significant obstacles to these trials, raising the question of whether they may be conducted with alteration or waiver of informed consent. However, to even be eligible, such a trial in the United States must have no more than minimal research risk. We argue that standard-of-care pragmatic clinical trials can be designed to ensure that they are minimal research risk if the random assignment of an intervention in a pragmatic clinical trial can accommodate individualized, clinically motivated decision-making for each participant. Such a design will ensure that the patient-participants are not exposed to any risks beyond the clinical risks of the interventions, and thus, the trial will have minimal research risk. We explain the logic of this view by comparing three scenarios of standard-of-care pragmatic clinical trials: one with informed consent, one without informed consent, and one recently proposed design called Decision Architecture Randomization Trial. We then conclude by briefly showing that our proposal suggests a natural way to determine when to use an alteration versus a waiver of informed consent.

Design and implementation of community consultation for research conducted under exception from informed consent regulations for the PreVent and the PreVent 2 trials: Changes over time and during the COVID-19 pandemic.

INTRODUCTION: Emergency clinical research has played an important role in improving outcomes for acutely ill patients. This is due in part to regulatory measures that allow Exception From Informed Consent (EFIC) trials. The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) requires sponsor-investigators to engage in community consultation and public disclosure activities prior to initiating an Exception From Informed Consent trial. Various approaches to community consultation and public disclosure have been described and adapted to local contexts and Institutional Review Board (IRB) interpretations. The COVID-19 pandemic has precluded the ability to engage local communities through direct, in-person public venues, requiring research teams to find alternative ways to inform communities about emergency research. METHODS: The PreVent and PreVent 2 studies were two Exception From Informed Consent trials of emergency endotracheal intubation, conducted in one geographic location for the PreVent Study and in two geographic locations for the PreVent 2 Study. During the period of the two studies, there was a substantial shift in the methodological approach spanning across the periods before and after the pandemic from telephone, to in-person, to virtual settings. RESULTS: During the 10 years of implementation of Exception From Informed Consent activities for the two PreVent trials, there was overall favorable public support for the concept of Exception From Informed Consent trials and for the importance of emergency clinical research. Community concerns were few and also did not differ much by method of contact. Attendance was higher with the implementation of virtual technology to reach members of the community, and overall feedback was more positive compared with telephone contacts or in-person events. However, the proportion of survey responses received after completion of the remote, live event was substantially lower, with a greater proportion of respondents having higher education levels. This suggests less active engagement after completion of the synchronous activity and potentially higher selection bias among respondents. Importantly, we found that engagement with local community leaders was a key component to develop appropriate plans to connect with the public. CONCLUSION: The PreVent experience illustrated operational advantages and disadvantages to community consultation conducted primarily by telephone, in-person events, or online activities. Approaches to enhance community acceptance included partnering with community leaders to optimize the communication strategies and trust building with the involvement of Institutional Review Board representatives during community meetings. Researchers might need to pivot from in-person planning to virtual techniques while maintaining the ability to engage with the public with two-way communication approaches. Due to less active engagement, and potential for selection bias in the responders, further research is needed to address the costs and benefits of virtual community consultation and public disclosure activities compared to in-person events.

Strategies to promote treatment compliance: a grounded theory study with relatives of people with a serious mental health condition.

BACKGROUND: Treatment pressures encompass communicative strategies that influence mental healthcare service users' decision-making to increase their compliance with recommended treatment. Persuasion, interpersonal leverage, inducements, and threats have been described as examples of treatment pressures. Research indicates that treatment pressures are exerted not only by mental healthcare professionals but also by relatives. While relatives play a crucial role in their family member's pathway to care, research on the use of treatment pressures by relatives is still scarce. Likewise, little is known about other strategies relatives may use to promote the treatment compliance of their family member with a serious mental health condition. In particular, no study to date has investigated this from the perspective of relatives of people with a serious mental health condition. AIM: The aim of this study was to answer the following research questions: Which types of treatment pressures do relatives use? Which other strategies do relatives use to promote the treatment compliance of their family member with a serious mental health condition? How do treatment pressures relate to these other strategies? METHODS: Eleven semi-structured interviews were conducted with relatives of people with a serious mental health condition in Germany. Participants were approached via relatives' self-help groups and flyers in a local psychiatric hospital. Inclusion criteria were having a family member with a psychiatric diagnosis and the family member having experienced formal coercion. The data were analyzed using grounded theory methodology. RESULTS: Relatives use a variety of strategies to promote the treatment compliance of their family member with a serious mental health condition. These strategies can be categorized into three general approaches: influencing the decision-making of the family member; not leaving the family member with a choice; and changing the social or legal context of the decision-making process. Our results show that the strategies that relatives use to promote their family member's treatment compliance go beyond the treatment pressures thus far described in the literature. CONCLUSION: This qualitative study supports and conceptually expands prior findings that treatment pressures are not only frequently used within mental healthcare services but also by relatives in the home setting. Mental healthcare professionals should acknowledge the difficulties faced and efforts undertaken by relatives in seeking treatment for their family member. At the same time, they should recognize that a service user's consent to treatment may be affected and limited by strategies to promote treatment compliance employed by relatives.

Cost Effectiveness of Additional Preoperative Telephone Call to Increase Surgical Preparedness: Analysis of a Randomized Clinical Trial.

INTRODUCTION AND HYPOTHESIS: There is a need for cost effective interventions that increase surgical preparedness in urogynecology. METHODS: We performed an ancillary prospective economic evaluation of the Telehealth Intervention to Increase Patient Preparedness for Surgery (TIPPS) Trial, a randomized multicenter trial that evaluated the impact of a preoperative telehealth call on surgical preparedness in women undergoing urogynecologic surgery. A within-trial analysis from the health care sector and societal perspective was performed. Cost-effectiveness was computed from health care sector and societal perspectives, with an 8-week time horizon. RESULTS: A total of 126 women were included in our analysis. QALYs gained were similar between groups (telehealth 0.1414 + 0.0249; usual care 0.1409 + 0.0179). The cumulative mean per-person costs at 8 weeks from the healthcare sector perspective were telehealth call: $8696 +/- 3341; usual care: $8473 +/- 3118 (p = 0.693) and from the societal perspective were telehealth call: $11,195 + 5191; usual care: $11,213 +/- 4869 (p = 0.944). The preoperative telehealth call intervention was not cost effective from the health care sector perspective with an ICER of $460,091/QALY (95%CI -$7,382,608/QALY, $7,673,961) using the generally accepted maximum willingness to pay threshold of $150,000/QALY (Neumann et al. N Engl J Med. 371(9):796-7, 2014). From the societal perspective, because incremental costs per QALY gained were negative $-35,925/QALY (95%CI, -$382,978/QALY, $317,226), results suggest that preoperative telehealth call dominated usual care. CONCLUSIONS: A preoperative telehealth call is cost effective from the society perspective. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: Registered with http://ClinicalTrials.gov . Date of registration: March 26, 2019 Date of initial participant enrollment: June 5, 2019 URL: https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/record/NCT03890471 Clinical trial identification number: NCT03890471.

Experienced disrespect & abuse during childbirth and associated birth characteristics: a cross-sectional survey in the Netherlands.

BACKGROUND: Experiencing upsetting disrespect and abuse (D&A) during labour and birth negatively affects women's birth experiences. Knowing in what circumstances of birth women experience upsetting situations of D&A can create general awareness and help healthcare providers judge the need for extra attention in their care to help reduce these experiences. However, little is known about how different birth characteristics relate to the experience of D&A. Previous studies showed differences in birth experiences and experienced D&A between primiparous and multiparous women. This study explores, stratified for parity, (1) how often D&A are experienced in the Netherlands and are considered upsetting, and (2) which birth characteristics are associated with these upsetting experiences of D&A. METHODS: For this cross-sectional study, an online questionnaire was set up and disseminated among women over 16 years of age who gave birth in the Netherlands between 2015 and 2020. D&A was divided into seven categories: emotional pressure, unfriendly behaviour/verbal abuse, use of force/physical violence, communication issues, lack of support, lack of consent and discrimination. Stratified for parity, univariable and multivariable logistic regression analyses were performed to examine which birth characteristics were associated with the upsetting experiences of different categories of D&A. RESULTS: Of all 11,520 women included in this study, 45.1% of primiparous and 27.0% of multiparous women reported at least one upsetting experience of D&A. Lack of consent was reported most frequently, followed by communication issues. For both primiparous and multiparous women, especially transfer from midwife-led to obstetrician-led care, giving birth in a hospital, assisted vaginal birth, and unplanned cesarean section were important factors that increased the odds of experiencing upsetting situations of D&A. Among primiparous women, the use of medical pain relief was also associated with upsetting experiences of D&A. CONCLUSION: A significant number of women experience upsetting disrespectful and abusive care during birth, particularly when medical interventions are needed after the onset of labour, when care is transferred during birth, and when birth takes place in a hospital. This study emphasizes the need for improving quality of verbal and non-verbal communication, support and adequate decision-making and consent procedures, especially before, during, and after the situations of birth that are associated with D&A.

Parturients feel capable of giving informed consent for epidural analgesia: A qualitative and quantitative analysis.

INTRODUCTION: The patient's right to autonomy confirmed by informed consent is a cornerstone in modern medicine. Epidural analgesia is increasingly popular in obstetric analgesia, but physicians disagree whether labour pain impairs parturient decision-making. We investigated the fraction of parturients feeling capable of giving informed consent including their knowledge of risks. METHODS: Bedside survey postpartum women at the Herlev Hospital, Denmark. The inclusion criteria were recipient of epidural analgesia during labour. A power calculation based on the recognition of genuine and false side effects required the inclusion of 50 participants. RESULTS: Forty out of fifty (80%) of the participants felt they could make a judicious consent during labour and 46 out of 50 (92%) felt they knew enough about epidural analgesia to give consent to the procedure again if necessary. Participants spontaneously reported a median of two risks associated with epidural analgesia. Additionally, when prompted with a cued list of true and false risks from epidural analgesia, the participants reported on average 5.1 genuine risks compared with 0.4 made-up risks. The difference (4.7) suggests the included women could discern genuine risks from made-up risks. DISCUSSION: The majority of participants reported the capacity to give informed consent. Our quantitative results show the participants could clearly distinguish genuine risks of epidural labour analgesia from made-up risks. Our qualitative data likewise suggest that participants understood the information and consequently their informed consent was genuine. Accordingly, parturients are able to give informed consent. This is supported by parturients' ability to identify risks from epidural labour analgesia.

Leveraging artificial intelligence to detect ethical concerns in medical research: a case study.

BACKGROUND: Institutional review boards (IRBs) have been criticised for delays in approvals for research proposals due to inadequate or inexperienced IRB staff. Artificial intelligence (AI), particularly large language models (LLMs), has significant potential to assist IRB members in a prompt and efficient reviewing process. METHODS: Four LLMs were evaluated on whether they could identify potential ethical issues in seven validated case studies. The LLMs were prompted with queries related to the proposed eligibility criteria of the study participants, vulnerability issues, information to be disclosed in the informed consent document (ICD), risk-benefit assessment and justification of the use of a placebo. Another query was issued to the LLMs to generate ICDs for these case scenarios. RESULTS: All four LLMs were able to provide answers to the queries related to all seven cases. In general, the responses were homogeneous with respect to most elements. LLMs performed suboptimally in identifying the suitability of the placebo arm, risk mitigation strategies and potential risks to study participants in certain case studies with a single prompt. However, multiple prompts led to better outputs in all of these domains. Each of the LLMs included all of the fundamental elements of the ICD for all case scenarios. Use of jargon, understatement of benefits and failure to state potential risks were the key observations in the AI-generated ICD. CONCLUSION: It is likely that LLMs can enhance the identification of potential ethical issues in clinical research, and they can be used as an adjunct tool to prescreen research proposals and enhance the efficiency of an IRB.

Consent-GPT: is it ethical to delegate procedural consent to conversational AI?

Obtaining informed consent from patients prior to a medical or surgical procedure is a fundamental part of safe and ethical clinical practice. Currently, it is routine for a significant part of the consent process to be delegated to members of the clinical team not performing the procedure (eg, junior doctors). However, it is common for consent-taking delegates to lack sufficient time and clinical knowledge to adequately promote patient autonomy and informed decision-making. Such problems might be addressed in a number of ways. One possible solution to this clinical dilemma is through the use of conversational artificial intelligence using large language models (LLMs). There is considerable interest in the potential benefits of such models in medicine. For delegated procedural consent, LLM could improve patients' access to the relevant procedural information and therefore enhance informed decision-making.In this paper, we first outline a hypothetical example of delegation of consent to LLMs prior to surgery. We then discuss existing clinical guidelines for consent delegation and some of the ways in which current practice may fail to meet the ethical purposes of informed consent. We outline and discuss the ethical implications of delegating consent to LLMs in medicine concluding that at least in certain clinical situations, the benefits of LLMs potentially far outweigh those of current practices.

Undermining autonomy and consent: the transformative experience of disease.

Disease radically changes the life of many people and satisfies formal criteria for being a transformative experience. According to the influential philosophy of Paul, transformative experiences undermine traditional criteria for rational decision-making. Thus, the transformative experience of disease can challenge basic principles and rules in medical ethics, such as patient autonomy and informed consent. This article applies Paul's theory of transformative experience and its expansion by Carel and Kidd to investigate the implications for medical ethics. It leads to the very uncomfortable conclusion that disease involves transformative experiences in ways that can reduce people's rational decision-making ability and undermine the basic principle of respect for autonomy and the moral rule of informed consent. While such cases are limited, they are crucial for medical ethics and health policy and deserve more attention and further scrutiny.

Medical authority and expectations of conformity: crystallising a key barrier to person-centred care during labour and childbirth.

Those giving birth within modern maternity systems are recognised as facing a number of barriers to person-centred care. In this paper, I argue that in order to best facilitate the conditions for positive change, work needs to be done to provide a more granular articulation of the specific barriers. I then offer a nuanced and contextually aware articulation of one key component of the overall failure to ensure person-centred care: medical authority and the expectation of conformity. Articulating these barriers with increased specificity is valuable, as it creates a stronger foundation from which to challenge existing problems which serve to constrain the autonomy of birthing individuals. The analysis offered in this paper also underscores the need for change at an institutional, rather than individual, level.