Systematic review and metasummary of attitudes toward research in emergency medical conditions

Alexander T. Limkakeng, Lucas Lentini Herling de Oliveira, Tais Moreira, Amruta Phadtare, Clarissa Garcia Rodrigues, Michael B. Hocker, Ross McKinney, Corrine I. Voils, Ricardo Pietrobon

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

9 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Emergency departments are challenging research settings, where truly informed consent can be difficult to obtain. A deeper understanding of emergency medical patients' opinions about research is needed. We conducted a systematic review and meta-summary of quantitative and qualitative studies on which values, attitudes, or beliefs of emergent medical research participants influence research participation. We included studies of adults that investigated opinions toward emergency medicine research participation. We excluded studies focused on the association between demographics or consent document features and participation and those focused on non-emergency research. In August 2011, we searched the following databases: MEDLINE, EMBASE, Google Scholar, Scirus, PsycINFO, AgeLine and Global Health. Titles, abstracts and then full manuscripts were independently evaluated by two reviewers. Disagreements were resolved by consensus and adjudicated by a third author. Studies were evaluated for bias using standardised scores. We report themes associated with participation or refusal. Our initial search produced over 1800 articles. A total of 44 articles were extracted for full-manuscript analysis, and 14 were retained based on our eligibility criteria. Among factors favouring participation, altruism and personal health benefit had the highest frequency. Mistrust of researchers, feeling like a 'guinea pig' and risk were leading factors favouring refusal. Many studies noted limitations of informed consent processes in emergent conditions. We conclude that highlighting the benefits to the participant and society, mitigating risk and increasing public trust may increase research participation in emergency medical research. New methods for conducting informed consent in such studies are needed.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)401-408
Number of pages8
JournalJournal of Medical Ethics
Volume40
Issue number6
DOIs
StatePublished - 2014

Fingerprint

Emergencies
participation
Informed Consent
Research
Manuscripts
medical research
Biomedical Research
Consent Forms
Altruism
risk society
Guinea
opinion research
Emergency Medicine
value-orientation
altruism
Insurance Benefits
health
MEDLINE
search engine
Participation

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Health(social science)
  • Issues, ethics and legal aspects
  • Arts and Humanities (miscellaneous)
  • Health Policy

Cite this

Limkakeng, A. T., de Oliveira, L. L. H., Moreira, T., Phadtare, A., Rodrigues, C. G., Hocker, M. B., ... Pietrobon, R. (2014). Systematic review and metasummary of attitudes toward research in emergency medical conditions. Journal of Medical Ethics, 40(6), 401-408. https://doi.org/10.1136/medethics-2012-101147

Systematic review and metasummary of attitudes toward research in emergency medical conditions. / Limkakeng, Alexander T.; de Oliveira, Lucas Lentini Herling; Moreira, Tais; Phadtare, Amruta; Rodrigues, Clarissa Garcia; Hocker, Michael B.; McKinney, Ross; Voils, Corrine I.; Pietrobon, Ricardo.

In: Journal of Medical Ethics, Vol. 40, No. 6, 2014, p. 401-408.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Limkakeng, AT, de Oliveira, LLH, Moreira, T, Phadtare, A, Rodrigues, CG, Hocker, MB, McKinney, R, Voils, CI & Pietrobon, R 2014, 'Systematic review and metasummary of attitudes toward research in emergency medical conditions', Journal of Medical Ethics, vol. 40, no. 6, pp. 401-408. https://doi.org/10.1136/medethics-2012-101147
Limkakeng, Alexander T. ; de Oliveira, Lucas Lentini Herling ; Moreira, Tais ; Phadtare, Amruta ; Rodrigues, Clarissa Garcia ; Hocker, Michael B. ; McKinney, Ross ; Voils, Corrine I. ; Pietrobon, Ricardo. / Systematic review and metasummary of attitudes toward research in emergency medical conditions. In: Journal of Medical Ethics. 2014 ; Vol. 40, No. 6. pp. 401-408.
@article{b7ce71dafd4f423db4b532b195ef74b8,
title = "Systematic review and metasummary of attitudes toward research in emergency medical conditions",
abstract = "Emergency departments are challenging research settings, where truly informed consent can be difficult to obtain. A deeper understanding of emergency medical patients' opinions about research is needed. We conducted a systematic review and meta-summary of quantitative and qualitative studies on which values, attitudes, or beliefs of emergent medical research participants influence research participation. We included studies of adults that investigated opinions toward emergency medicine research participation. We excluded studies focused on the association between demographics or consent document features and participation and those focused on non-emergency research. In August 2011, we searched the following databases: MEDLINE, EMBASE, Google Scholar, Scirus, PsycINFO, AgeLine and Global Health. Titles, abstracts and then full manuscripts were independently evaluated by two reviewers. Disagreements were resolved by consensus and adjudicated by a third author. Studies were evaluated for bias using standardised scores. We report themes associated with participation or refusal. Our initial search produced over 1800 articles. A total of 44 articles were extracted for full-manuscript analysis, and 14 were retained based on our eligibility criteria. Among factors favouring participation, altruism and personal health benefit had the highest frequency. Mistrust of researchers, feeling like a 'guinea pig' and risk were leading factors favouring refusal. Many studies noted limitations of informed consent processes in emergent conditions. We conclude that highlighting the benefits to the participant and society, mitigating risk and increasing public trust may increase research participation in emergency medical research. New methods for conducting informed consent in such studies are needed.",
author = "Limkakeng, {Alexander T.} and {de Oliveira}, {Lucas Lentini Herling} and Tais Moreira and Amruta Phadtare and Rodrigues, {Clarissa Garcia} and Hocker, {Michael B.} and Ross McKinney and Voils, {Corrine I.} and Ricardo Pietrobon",
year = "2014",
doi = "10.1136/medethics-2012-101147",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "40",
pages = "401--408",
journal = "Journal of Medical Ethics",
issn = "0306-6800",
publisher = "BMJ Publishing Group",
number = "6",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Systematic review and metasummary of attitudes toward research in emergency medical conditions

AU - Limkakeng, Alexander T.

AU - de Oliveira, Lucas Lentini Herling

AU - Moreira, Tais

AU - Phadtare, Amruta

AU - Rodrigues, Clarissa Garcia

AU - Hocker, Michael B.

AU - McKinney, Ross

AU - Voils, Corrine I.

AU - Pietrobon, Ricardo

PY - 2014

Y1 - 2014

N2 - Emergency departments are challenging research settings, where truly informed consent can be difficult to obtain. A deeper understanding of emergency medical patients' opinions about research is needed. We conducted a systematic review and meta-summary of quantitative and qualitative studies on which values, attitudes, or beliefs of emergent medical research participants influence research participation. We included studies of adults that investigated opinions toward emergency medicine research participation. We excluded studies focused on the association between demographics or consent document features and participation and those focused on non-emergency research. In August 2011, we searched the following databases: MEDLINE, EMBASE, Google Scholar, Scirus, PsycINFO, AgeLine and Global Health. Titles, abstracts and then full manuscripts were independently evaluated by two reviewers. Disagreements were resolved by consensus and adjudicated by a third author. Studies were evaluated for bias using standardised scores. We report themes associated with participation or refusal. Our initial search produced over 1800 articles. A total of 44 articles were extracted for full-manuscript analysis, and 14 were retained based on our eligibility criteria. Among factors favouring participation, altruism and personal health benefit had the highest frequency. Mistrust of researchers, feeling like a 'guinea pig' and risk were leading factors favouring refusal. Many studies noted limitations of informed consent processes in emergent conditions. We conclude that highlighting the benefits to the participant and society, mitigating risk and increasing public trust may increase research participation in emergency medical research. New methods for conducting informed consent in such studies are needed.

AB - Emergency departments are challenging research settings, where truly informed consent can be difficult to obtain. A deeper understanding of emergency medical patients' opinions about research is needed. We conducted a systematic review and meta-summary of quantitative and qualitative studies on which values, attitudes, or beliefs of emergent medical research participants influence research participation. We included studies of adults that investigated opinions toward emergency medicine research participation. We excluded studies focused on the association between demographics or consent document features and participation and those focused on non-emergency research. In August 2011, we searched the following databases: MEDLINE, EMBASE, Google Scholar, Scirus, PsycINFO, AgeLine and Global Health. Titles, abstracts and then full manuscripts were independently evaluated by two reviewers. Disagreements were resolved by consensus and adjudicated by a third author. Studies were evaluated for bias using standardised scores. We report themes associated with participation or refusal. Our initial search produced over 1800 articles. A total of 44 articles were extracted for full-manuscript analysis, and 14 were retained based on our eligibility criteria. Among factors favouring participation, altruism and personal health benefit had the highest frequency. Mistrust of researchers, feeling like a 'guinea pig' and risk were leading factors favouring refusal. Many studies noted limitations of informed consent processes in emergent conditions. We conclude that highlighting the benefits to the participant and society, mitigating risk and increasing public trust may increase research participation in emergency medical research. New methods for conducting informed consent in such studies are needed.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84901281889&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84901281889&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1136/medethics-2012-101147

DO - 10.1136/medethics-2012-101147

M3 - Article

C2 - 23665997

AN - SCOPUS:84901281889

VL - 40

SP - 401

EP - 408

JO - Journal of Medical Ethics

JF - Journal of Medical Ethics

SN - 0306-6800

IS - 6

ER -