Abstracts
Abstract
The ethical conduct of research in any setting hinges on the voluntary and informed consent of research participants. Working towards consent that is truly voluntary and informed, however, is far from straightforward, and requires attention to contextual factors that may complicate achievement of this ideal in specific research settings. This paper is based on Madagascar’s first “Consent complexities in health research in Madagascar” workshop, held in Antananarivo, Madagascar, in October 2018. It identifies a number of challenges encountered by individuals responsible for the conduct or oversight of health research in Madagascar related to informed and voluntary consent. Key challenges identified included: adaptation of consent tools into local dialects and for limited literacy populations; perceived acquiescence of potential participants regardless of actual preference based on cultural norms; perceived time pressures within tight project timelines to collect data as quickly as possible, limited time for consent processes; fears and taboos related to specific research procedures or topics; and, uncertainty about how best to approach and verify the validity of individual consent in contexts where traditional leaders’ influence is conventionally sought out and respected. Potential strategies for responding to each of these challenges are proposed, as are key questions meriting further study.
Keywords:
- research ethics,
- consent,
- Madagascar,
- research on research,
- global health,
- Sub-Saharan Africa
Résumé
La conduite éthique de la recherche, quel que soit le contexte, dépend du consentement volontaire et éclairé de ses participants. Cependant, assurer un consentement volontaire et éclairé est loin d’être facile, et nécessite une compréhension des facteurs contextuels qui peuvent compliquer sa réalisation dans des contextes de recherche particuliers. Cet article est basé sur le premier atelier sur les « Complexités du consentement à la recherche en santé à Madagascar », qui s’est tenu à Antananarivo, Madagascar, en octobre 2018. Y sont présentés différents défis liés au consentement libre et éclairé auxquels font face les personnes chargées de la mise en oeuvre ou de la surveillance de la recherche en santé à Madagascar. Les défis clefs identifiés lors de l’atelier comprennent : la traduction et l’adaptation des protocoles pour usage en dialectes locaux et auprès de populations peu scolarisées; l’acquiescence perçue des participants à la recherche, conformément aux normes culturelles, et qui pourrait masquer leurs préférences réelles; les contraintes de temps engendrées par des échéanciers de recherche serrés qui allouent peu de temps à la collecte de donnée, et donc aux processus de consentement; l’existence de craintes et de tabous par rapport à certaines procédures ou certains sujets de recherche; et l’incertitude quant à comment approcher et comment s’assurer de la validité du consentement individuel dans des contextes où l’avis des chefs traditionnels est communément cherché et respecté. L’article propose des stratégies pour faire face à ces défis et des questions devant faire l’objet de recherches plus poussées.
Mots-clés :
- éthique de la recherche,
- consentement,
- Madagascar,
- recherche sur la recherche,
- santé mondiale,
- Afrique subsaharienne
Appendices
Bibliography
- 1. Council for International Organizations of Medical Sciences (CIOMS). International Ethical Guidelines for Health-related Research Involving Human Subjects. 2016.
- 2. Emmanuel EJ, Wendler D, Grady C. What makes clinical research ethical? JAMA. 2000;283(20):2701-2711.
- 3. World Medical Association (WMA). The Declaration of Helsinki. 2013.
- 4. Croix BF. Gammée contre caducée: les expériences humaines en Allemagne pendant la Deuxième Guerre Mondiale. Berlin, Germany: Commission Scientifique des Crimes de Guerre; 1950.
- 5. The Nuremberg Code (1947). BMJ.1996;1947313:1448.
- 6. Diamond E. The Willowbrook experiments. The Linacre Quarterly. 1973;40(2):9.
- 7. Mosby I. Administering colonial science: nutrition research and human biomedical experimentation in aboriginal communities and residential schools, 1942–1952. Histoire sociale/Social history. 2013;46(1):145-172.
- 8. Reverby S. Examining Tuskegee: The Infamous Syphilis Study and Its Legacy. University of North Carolina Press; 2013.
- 9. Lerner BH. Subjects or objects? Prisoners and human experimentation. NEJM. 2007;356(18):1806-1807.
- 10. Washington H. Medical Apartheid: The Dark History of Medical Experimentation On Black Americans from Colonial Times to the Present. Knopf Doubleday Publishing Group; 2006.
- 11. Bhan A, Majd M, Adejumo A. Informed consent in international research: perspectives from India, Iran and Nigeria. Medical Ethics. 2006;3(1):36-41.
- 12. Gikonyo C, Bejon P, Marsh V, Molyneux S. Taking social relationships seriously: lessons learned from the informed consent practices of a vaccine trial on the Kenyan Coast. Social Science and Medicine. 2008;67(5):708-720.
- 13. Marshall, PA. Informed consent in international health research. Journal of Empirical Research on Human Research Ethics. 2006;1(1):25-42.
- 14. Sherwin S. A relational approach to autonomy in health care. In: Sherwin S, Feminist Healthcare Network, editors. The Politics of Women’s Health: Exploring Agency and Autonomy. 1st ed. Philadelphia: Temple University Press; 1998. p. 19-24.
- 15. Tekola F, Bull SJ, Farsides J, et al. Tailoring consent to context: Designing an appropriate consent process for a biomedical study in a low-income setting. PLOS Neglected Tropical Diseases. 2009;3(7):e482.
- 16. Abdool Karim Q, Abdool Karim S, Coovadia HM, Susser M. Informed consent for HIV testing in a South African hospital: is it truly informed and truly voluntary? American Journal of Public Health. 1998;88(4):637-640.
- 17. Afolabi MO, Okebe JU, McGrath N, et al. Informed consent comprehension in African research settings. Tropical Medicine & International Health. 2014;19(6):625–642.
- 18. Molyneux CS, Wassenaar DR, Peshu N, Marsh K. ‘Even if they ask you to stand by a tree all day, you will have to do it (laughter)…!’: Community voices on the notion and practice of informed consent for bio-medical research in developing countries. Soc Sci Med. 2005;61(2):443–454.
- 19. Ssali A, Poland F, Seeley J. Exploring informed consent in HIV clinical trials: A case study in Uganda. Heliyon. 2016;2(11):1-26.
- 20. Kingori P. The ‘empty choice’: A sociological examination of choosing medical research participation in resource-limited Sub-Saharan Africa. Current Sociology. 2015;63(5):763-778.
- 21. Osamor PE, Kass N. Decision-making and motivation to participate in biomedical research in southwest Nigeria. Developing World Bioethics. 2012;12(2):87–95.
- 22. Molyneux S, Bull S. Consent and community engagement in diverse research contexts: reviewing and developing research practice: Participants in the Community Engagement and Consent Workshop Kilifi, Kenya, March 2011. Journal of Empirical Research on Human Research Ethics. 2013;8(4):1-18.
- 23. Staunton C, Moodley K. Challenges in biobank governance in Sub-Saharan Africa. BMC Medical Ethics. 2013;14(35):1-8.
- 24. Tindana P, Bull S, Amenga-Etego L, et al. Seeking consent to genetic and genomic research in a rural Ghanaian setting: A qualitative study of the MalariaGEN experience. BMC Medical Ethics, 2012;13:1-12.
- 25. Abramowitz S, Lindley McKune S, et al. The opposite of denial: social learning at the onset of the ebola emergency in Liberia. Journal of Health Communication. 2017;22(sup1):59-65.
- 26. Emergency Ebola Anthropology Network (EEAN) Advisory Brief: Culture and Clinical Trials. Ebola Response Anthropology Platform; 2015.
- 27. Médecins Sans Frontières Ethics Review Board. Research Ethics Framework: Guidance document. Médecins Sans Frontières. 2008.
- 28. Nuffield Council on Bioethics. The Ethics of Research related to Healthcare in developing Countries. 2002.
- 29. Bhutta Z. Beyond informed consent. Bull World Health Organization. 2004;82(10):771-777.
- 30. Koonrungsesomboon N, Laothavorn J, Chokevivat V, Hirayama K, Karbwang J. SIDCER informed consent form: principles and a developmental guideline. Indian Journal of Medical Ethics. 2016;1(2):83-86.
- 31. Annas GJ. Globalized clinical trials and informed consent. NEJM. 2009;360(20):2050-2053.
- 32. Krosin MT, Klitzman R, Levin B, Cheng J, Ranney ML. Problems in comprehension of informed consent in rural and peri-urban Mali, West Africa. Clinical Trials. 2006;3(3):306-313.
- 33. Moodley K, Pather M, Myer L. Informed consent and participant perceptions of influenza vaccine trials in South Africa. Journal of Medical Ethics. 2005;31(12):727-732.
- 34. Munalula-Nkandu E, Ndebele P, Siziya S, Munthali JC. To what did they consent? understanding consent among low literacy participants in a microbicide feasibility study in Mazabuka, Zambia. Developing World Bioethics. 2015;15(3):248-256.
- 35. Ndebele PM, Wassenaar D, Munalula E, et al. Improving understanding of clinical trial procedures among low literacy populations: an intervention within a microbicide trial in Malawi. BMC Med Ethics. 2012;13(29).
- 36. Ward CL, Shaw D, Anane-Sarpong E, Sankoh O, Tanner M, Elger B. The ethics of health care delivery in a pediatric malaria vaccine trial: the perspectives of stakeholders from Ghana and Tanzania. Journal of Empirical Research on Human Research Ethics. 2018;13(1):26-41.
- 37. Molyneux S, Gobat N, Cheah P, et al. Working with community advisory boards for COVID-19 related clinical studies. Novel Coronavirus. WHO Good Participatory Practices for COVID-19 research Working Group; 23 April 2020.
- 38. Nouvet E, Hunt M, Schwartz LJ. ‘Is there anything else you would like to add?’: the ethics of (not) addressing research participants' top concerns in public health emergency health research. Frontiers in Public Health. 2022; 10:796414.
- 39. Nouvet E, Sheather J, Barry SP, et al. Challenges and ethical considerations for research in the context of international public health emergencies. 2021. London, UK: Nuffield Bioethics Council.
- 40. Nouvet E, Chenier A, Kouyate S. Participants’ perceptions of Ebola research: Report to participants. Hamilton: Humanitarian Health Ethics; 2018.
- 41. Nouvet E. Extraordinary aid and its shadow: The significance of gratitude in Nicaraaguan humanitarian healthcare. Critique of Anthropology. 2016;36(3):1-20. Working with community advisory boards for COVID-19 related clinical studies. Novel Coronavirus. 2020. WHO Good Participatory Practices for COVID-19 research Working Group. 2020.
- 42. Canadian Institutes of Health Research, Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada, and Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada (Tri-Council). Tri-Council Policy Statement: Ethical Conduct for Research Involving Humans. Ottawa; 2018.
- 43. Kalichman M. Evidence-based research ethics. American Journal of Bioethics. 2009;9(6-7):85-87.
- 44. McDonald M, Cox S. Moving toward evidence-based human participant protection. Journal of Academic Ethics. 2009;7(1).
- 45. Neufeld SD, Chapman J, Crier N, et al. Research 101: A process for developing local guidelines for ethical research in heavily researched communities. Harm Reduction Journal. 2019;16(41).
- 46. Appelbaum PS, Grisso T. Assessing patients’ capacities to consent to treatment. NEJM. 1988;319(25):1635-1638.
- 47. Wright K et al. Workshop report: community engagement in and for ethical research in outbreaks of infectious diseases and other humanitarian crises. 2019. London, U.K.: Nuffield Bioethics Council.
- 48. Brunger F, Wall D. What do they really mean by partnerships? Questioning the unquestionable good in ethics guidelines promoting community engagement in indigenous health research. Qualitative Health Research. 2016;26(13):1862-1877.
- 49. McGregor D. From ‘decolonized’ to reconciliation research in canada: drawing from indigenous research paradigms. ACME: An International Journal for Critical Geographies. 2018;17(3):810-831.