Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Review
. 2021 Mar 2;22(1):21.
doi: 10.1186/s12910-021-00592-9.

Facing new challenges to informed consent processes in the context of translational research: the case in CARPEM consortium

Elise Jacquier  1 , Pierre Laurent-Puig  2   3 , Cécile Badoual  4 , Anita Burgun  5   6   7 , Marie-France Mamzer  8   9
Affiliations
Review

Facing new challenges to informed consent processes in the context of translational research: the case in CARPEM consortium

Elise Jacquier et al. BMC Med Ethics. .

Abstract

Background: In the context of translational research, researchers have increasingly been using biological samples and data in fundamental research phases. To explore informed consent practices, we conducted a retrospective study on informed consent documents that were used for CARPEM's translational research programs. This review focused on detailing their form, their informational content, and the adequacy of these documents with the international ethical principles and participants' rights.

Methods: Informed consent forms (ICFs) were collected from CARPEM investigators. A content analysis focused on information related to biological samples and data treatment (context of sampling and collect, aims, reuse, consent renewal), including the type of consent. An automatic assessment of the readability of the ICFs were performed with the IT program "Flesch Score".

Results: 29 ICFs from 25 of 49 studies were analyzed after selection criteria were applied. Three types of consent were identified: 11 broad consents, six specific consents, and two opt-out consents. The Flesch Scores showed that most of the documents were too complex to be fully understood by most of the potential research participants. Most of the biological samples were collected during the healthcare routine, but the information content about secondary use of biological samples varied between ICFs. All documents mentioned personal data treatment but information about their reuse was not standardized in the ICFs.

Conclusions: Our review of current IC procedures of CARPEM showed that practices could be improved considering new translational research methods. "Old fashion written ICFs" should be adapted to the translational research approach, to better respect individual rights and international research ethics principles. In this context, theoretically, a digital tool allowing dynamic information and consent of participants, through an electronic interactive platform may be a good way to promote more active participation in research. Nevertheless, its feasibility in the complex environment of biological samples and data research remains to prove. The way of a combination of a broad consent followed by dynamic information may be alternatively tested.

Keywords: Biobank research; Dynamic consent; Informed consent; Partnership in research; Patient participation; Translational research.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Flowchart
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
Biological samples and data process from the collection to the use in research
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Woolf SH. The Meaning of Translational Research and Why It Matters. JAMA [Internet]. 9 janv 2008 [cité 18 avr 2019];299(2). Disponible sur: http://jama.jamanetwork.com/article.aspx?doi=10.1001/jama.2007.26 - PubMed
    1. Rubio DM, Schoenbaum EE, Lee LS, Schteingart DE, Marantz PR, Anderson KE, et al. Defining translational research: implications for training. Acad Med. 2010;85(3):470–5. doi: 10.1097/ACM.0b013e3181ccd618. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Hostiuc S, Moldoveanu A, Dascălu M-I, Unnthorsson R, Jóhannesson ÓI, Marcus I. Translational research-the need of a new bioethics approach. J Transl Med. 2016;14:16. doi: 10.1186/s12967-016-0773-4. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Surkis A, Hogle JA, DiazGranados D, Hunt JD, Mazmanian PE, Connors E, et al. Classifying publications from the clinical and translational science award program along the translational research spectrum: a machine learning approach. J Transl Med. 2016 doi: 10.1186/s12967-016-0992-8. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Mamzer M-F, Duchange N, Darquy S, Marvanne P, Rambaud C, Marsico G, et al. Partnering with patients in translational oncology research: ethical approach. J Transl Med. 2017;15(1):74. doi: 10.1186/s12967-017-1177-9. - DOI - PMC - PubMed

Publication types

LinkOut - more resources