Article

Seeking Assent and Respecting Dissent in Dementia Research

Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, Johns Hopkins Medical Institutions, Baltimore, MD, USA.
The American journal of geriatric psychiatry: official journal of the American Association for Geriatric Psychiatry (Impact Factor: 3.52). 01/2010; 18(1):77-85. DOI: 10.1097/JGP.0b013e3181bd1de2
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT Obtaining assent and respecting dissent are widely adopted safeguards when conducting dementia research involving individuals who lack consent capacity, but there is no consensus on how assent and dissent should be defined or what procedures should be used regarding them. Our objective was to provide recommendations on these issues based on the opinions of knowledgeable key informants.
Cross-sectional qualitative research.
University research institutions.
Forty informants, including 1) nationally known experts on dementia and research ethics, 2) dementia researchers, and 3) dementia caregivers and advocates.
Semistructured individual and focus group interviews, audio recorded, and transcribed for content analysis.
Assent and dissent should be defined broadly and based on an assessment of how adults who lack consent capacity can express or indicate their preferences verbally, behaviorally, or emotionally. Assent requires the ability to indicate a meaningful choice and at least a minimal level of understanding. Assent should be required whenever an individual has the ability to assent, and dissent should be binding if it is unequivocal or sustained after an effort to relieve concerns and/or distress. Standards for seeking assent and respecting dissent should not be linked to the risks or potential benefits of a study. Lacking the ability to assent and/or dissent should not automatically preclude research participation.
Obtaining assent and respecting dissent from individuals who lack consent capacity for dementia research allows them to participate, to the extent possible, in the consent process. Assent and dissent are important independent ethical constructs.

Download full-text

Full-text

Available from: Betty S Black, Feb 13, 2014
0 Followers
 · 
173 Views
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Effective nonpharmacological interventions are needed to treat neuropsychiatric symptoms and to improve quality of life for the 5.3 million Americans affected by dementia. The purpose of this study was to test the effect of a storytelling program, TimeSlips, on communication, neuropsychiatric symptoms, and quality of life in long-term care residents with dementia. A quasi-experimental, two-group, repeated measures design was used to compare persons with dementia who were assigned to the twice-weekly, 6-week TimeSlips intervention group (n = 28) or usual care group (n = 28) at baseline and postintervention at Weeks 7 and 10. Outcome measures included the Cornell Scale for Depression in Dementia, the Neuropsychiatric Inventory-Nursing Home Version, the Functional Assessment of Communication Skills, the Quality of Life-Alzheimer's Disease, and the Observed Emotion Rating Scale (this last measure was collected also at Weeks 3 and 6 during TimeSlips for the treatment group and during mealtime for the control group). Compared with the control group, the treatment group exhibited significantly higher pleasure at Week 3 (p < .001), Week 6 (p < .001), and Week 7 (p < .05). Small to moderate treatment effects were found for Week 7 social communication (d = .49) and basic needs communication (d = .43). A larger effect was found for pleasure at Week 7 (d = .58). As expected, given the engaging nature of the TimeSlips creative storytelling intervention, analyses revealed increased positive affect during and at 1 week postintervention. In addition, perhaps associated with the intervention's reliance on positive social interactions and verbal communication, participants evidenced improved communication skills. However, more frequent dosing and booster sessions of TimeSlips may be needed to show significant differences between treatment and control groups on long-term effects and other outcomes.
    Nursing research 11/2010; 59(6):417-25. DOI:10.1097/NNR.0b013e3181faff52 · 1.50 Impact Factor
  • Source
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The high rates of medical illness in older people, the high prevalence of cognitive disorder in the elderly, and the high prevalence of frailty in late life raise issues that occur infrequently in the care of younger adults. This article discusses the ethical issues that commonly arise in the setting of these medical and psychiatric morbidities, and emphasizes the need for clinicians and researchers to be knowledgeable about the belief systems and values of individual patients, of their carers when relevant, of themselves, and of research participants.
    International Review of Psychiatry 06/2010; 22(3):267-73. DOI:10.3109/09540261.2010.484016 · 1.80 Impact Factor
Show more