Randomisation before consent: avoiding delay to time-critical intervention and ensuring informed consent

Vicki Welch, Fiona Turner-Halliday, Nicholas Watson, Phil Wilson, Bridie Fitzpatrick, Richard Cotmore, Helen Minnis

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

1 Citation (Scopus)

Abstract

Obtaining informed consent can be challenging in stressful and urgent circumstances. One example is when potential participants have recently had their child removed into care; intervention is urgent and mandatory whereas participation in associated research is voluntary. Using a nested qualitative study, we examined experiences of consent processes in a randomised controlled trial (RCT) of a family assessment and intervention service for maltreated young children. Some potential participants found it difficult to use information; some believed consenting might influence the return of their child. In response to these ethical challenges, we propose reversing the typical process of securing consent, so that randomisation to an intervention occurs before inviting potential participants to consider the trial. This will avoid delays, delineate research from intervention, and make it easier to consider information. We suggest that this innovation could be useful in trials across service areas that incorporate urgent and complex interventions.
LanguageEnglish
Pages357-371
Number of pages25
JournalInternational Journal of Social Research Methodology
Volume20
Issue number4
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 11 May 2016

Fingerprint

Random Allocation
Informed Consent
Research
Randomized Controlled Trials
time
innovation
participation
experience

Keywords

  • informed consent
  • randomised controlled trial
  • ethical challenges

Cite this

Welch, Vicki ; Turner-Halliday, Fiona ; Watson, Nicholas ; Wilson, Phil ; Fitzpatrick, Bridie ; Cotmore, Richard ; Minnis, Helen. / Randomisation before consent : avoiding delay to time-critical intervention and ensuring informed consent. In: International Journal of Social Research Methodology. 2016 ; Vol. 20, No. 4. pp. 357-371.
@article{b022a6e92a9f46fd90f627803a9dcce3,
title = "Randomisation before consent: avoiding delay to time-critical intervention and ensuring informed consent",
abstract = "Obtaining informed consent can be challenging in stressful and urgent circumstances. One example is when potential participants have recently had their child removed into care; intervention is urgent and mandatory whereas participation in associated research is voluntary. Using a nested qualitative study, we examined experiences of consent processes in a randomised controlled trial (RCT) of a family assessment and intervention service for maltreated young children. Some potential participants found it difficult to use information; some believed consenting might influence the return of their child. In response to these ethical challenges, we propose reversing the typical process of securing consent, so that randomisation to an intervention occurs before inviting potential participants to consider the trial. This will avoid delays, delineate research from intervention, and make it easier to consider information. We suggest that this innovation could be useful in trials across service areas that incorporate urgent and complex interventions.",
keywords = "informed consent, randomised controlled trial , ethical challenges",
author = "Vicki Welch and Fiona Turner-Halliday and Nicholas Watson and Phil Wilson and Bridie Fitzpatrick and Richard Cotmore and Helen Minnis",
note = "This is an Accepted Manuscript of an article published by Taylor & Francis in International Journal of Social Research Methodology on [date of publication], available online: http://www.tandfonline.com/[Article DOI].”",
year = "2016",
month = "5",
day = "11",
doi = "10.1080/13645579.2016.1176751",
language = "English",
volume = "20",
pages = "357--371",
journal = "International Journal of Social Research Methodology",
issn = "1364-5579",
number = "4",

}

Randomisation before consent : avoiding delay to time-critical intervention and ensuring informed consent. / Welch, Vicki; Turner-Halliday, Fiona; Watson, Nicholas; Wilson, Phil; Fitzpatrick, Bridie; Cotmore, Richard; Minnis, Helen.

In: International Journal of Social Research Methodology, Vol. 20, No. 4, 11.05.2016, p. 357-371.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

TY - JOUR

T1 - Randomisation before consent

T2 - International Journal of Social Research Methodology

AU - Welch, Vicki

AU - Turner-Halliday, Fiona

AU - Watson, Nicholas

AU - Wilson, Phil

AU - Fitzpatrick, Bridie

AU - Cotmore, Richard

AU - Minnis, Helen

N1 - This is an Accepted Manuscript of an article published by Taylor & Francis in International Journal of Social Research Methodology on [date of publication], available online: http://www.tandfonline.com/[Article DOI].”

PY - 2016/5/11

Y1 - 2016/5/11

N2 - Obtaining informed consent can be challenging in stressful and urgent circumstances. One example is when potential participants have recently had their child removed into care; intervention is urgent and mandatory whereas participation in associated research is voluntary. Using a nested qualitative study, we examined experiences of consent processes in a randomised controlled trial (RCT) of a family assessment and intervention service for maltreated young children. Some potential participants found it difficult to use information; some believed consenting might influence the return of their child. In response to these ethical challenges, we propose reversing the typical process of securing consent, so that randomisation to an intervention occurs before inviting potential participants to consider the trial. This will avoid delays, delineate research from intervention, and make it easier to consider information. We suggest that this innovation could be useful in trials across service areas that incorporate urgent and complex interventions.

AB - Obtaining informed consent can be challenging in stressful and urgent circumstances. One example is when potential participants have recently had their child removed into care; intervention is urgent and mandatory whereas participation in associated research is voluntary. Using a nested qualitative study, we examined experiences of consent processes in a randomised controlled trial (RCT) of a family assessment and intervention service for maltreated young children. Some potential participants found it difficult to use information; some believed consenting might influence the return of their child. In response to these ethical challenges, we propose reversing the typical process of securing consent, so that randomisation to an intervention occurs before inviting potential participants to consider the trial. This will avoid delays, delineate research from intervention, and make it easier to consider information. We suggest that this innovation could be useful in trials across service areas that incorporate urgent and complex interventions.

KW - informed consent

KW - randomised controlled trial

KW - ethical challenges

U2 - 10.1080/13645579.2016.1176751

DO - 10.1080/13645579.2016.1176751

M3 - Article

VL - 20

SP - 357

EP - 371

JO - International Journal of Social Research Methodology

JF - International Journal of Social Research Methodology

SN - 1364-5579

IS - 4

ER -