Do Research Intermediaries Reduce Perceived Coercion to Enter Research Trials Among Criminally Involved Substance Abusers?
Graduate studies at Western
Ethics and Behavior 21 (3):252 - 259 (2011)
|Abstract||We examined the efficacy of including a research intermediary (RI) during the consent process in reducing participants' perceptions of coercion to enroll in a research study. Eighty-four drug court clients being recruited into an ongoing study were randomized to receive a standard informed consent process alone (standard condition) or with an RI (intermediary condition). Before obtaining consent, RIs met with clients individually to discuss remaining concerns. Findings provided preliminary evidence that RIs reduced client perceptions that their participation might influence how clinical and judicial staff view them. This suggests that using RIs may improve participant autonomy in clinical studies|
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
David S. Festinger, Kattiya Ratanadilok, Douglas B. Marlowe, Karen L. Dugosh, Nicholas S. Patapis & David S. DeMatteo (2007). Neuropsychological Functioning and Recall of Research Consent Information Among Drug Court Clients. Ethics and Behavior 17 (2):163 – 186.
Douglas B. Marlowe, Jason R. Croft, Karen L. Dugosh, David S. Festinger & Patricia L. Arabia (2011). Corrected Feedback: A Procedure to Enhance Recall of Informed Consent to Research Among Substance Abusing Offenders. Ethics and Behavior 20 (5):387-399.
David Wendler (2009). Must Research Participants Understand Randomization? American Journal of Bioethics 9 (2):3 – 8.
Angela Ballantyne (2008). Benefits to Research Subjects in International Trials: Do They Reduce Exploitation or Increase Undue Inducement? Developing World Bioethics 8 (3):178-191.
Janet L. Brody, John P. Cluck & Alfredo S. Aragon (1997). Participants' Understanding of the Process of Psychological Research: Informed Consent. Ethics and Behavior 7 (4):285 – 298.
Susan S. Khalil, Henry J. Silverman, May Raafat, Samer El-Kamary & Maged El-Setouhy (2007). Attitudes, Understanding, and Concerns Regarding Medical Research Amongst Egyptians: A Qualitative Pilot Study. [REVIEW] BMC Medical Ethics 8 (1):9.
Piotr Zaborowski & Adam Górski (2004). Informed Consent and the Use of Placebo in Poland: Ethical and Legal Aspects. Science and Engineering Ethics 10 (1).
Ronald Kiguba, Paul Kutyabami, Stephen Kiwuwa, Elly Katabira & Nelson Sewankambo (2012). Assessing the Quality of Informed Consent in a Resource-Limited Setting: A Cross-Sectional Study. [REVIEW] BMC Medical Ethics 13 (1):21-.
Michelle H. Biros (2007). Research Without Consent: Exception From and Waiver of Informed Consent in Resuscitation Research. Science and Engineering Ethics 13 (3):361-369.
Joanna Różyńska & Marek Czarkowski (2007). Emergency Research Without Consent Under Polish Law. Science and Engineering Ethics 13 (3):337-350.
Oonagh Corrigan (ed.) (2009). The Limits of Consent: A Socio-Ethical Approach to Human Subject Research in Medicine. Oxford University Press.
Eric R. Pedersen, Clayton Neighbors, Judy Tidwell & Ty W. Lostutter (2011). Do Undergraduate Student Research Participants Read Psychological Research Consent Forms? Examining Memory Effects, Condition Effects, and Individual Differences. Ethics and Behavior 21 (4):332 - 350.
Franklin G. Miller & Alan Wertheimer (2011). The Fair Transaction Model of Informed Consent: An Alternative to Autonomous Authorization. Kennedy Institute of Ethics Journal 21 (3):201-218.
Judy Allen & Beverley Mcnamara (2011). Reconsidering the Value of Consent in Biobank Research. Bioethics 25 (3):155-166.
Jennifer Susan Hawkins & Ezekiel J. Emanuel (2005). Clarifying Confusions About Coercion. Hastings Center Report 35 (5):16-19.
Added to index2011-05-26
Total downloads3 ( #214,062 of 740,793 )
Recent downloads (6 months)0
How can I increase my downloads?