TY - JOUR
T1 - Randomisation before consent
T2 - avoiding delay to time-critical intervention and ensuring informed consent
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
SN - 1364-5579
VL - 20
SP - 357
EP - 371
JO - International Journal of Social Research Methodology
JF - International Journal of Social Research Methodology
IS - 4
ER -