Recruitment processes for clinical trials are governed by guidelines and regulatory systems intended to ensure participation is informed and voluntary. Although the guidelines and systems provide some protection to potential participants, current recruitment processes often result in limited understanding and experiences of inadequate decision support. Many trials also have high drop-out rates among participants, which are ethically troubling because they can be indicative of poor experiences and they limit the usefulness of the knowledge the trials were designed to generate. Drawing on recent social-psychological and philosophical-ethical research on trial recruitment and patient participation in treatment decision-making, this paper identifies possibilities for improving communicative support for both initial decisions and ongoing participation in clinical trials. It highlights the potential of a shift in thinking about ‘voluntariness’, underpinned by relational understandings of autonomy, to encourage more nuanced judgements about the ethics of communication between trial staff and (potential) participants. The paper suggests that the idea of responsively enabling people to consider invitations or requests to participate in particular trials could serve as a general guide to communication. This might help ensure decisions about trial participation are meaningfully informed and voluntary, and that relationships between trial staff and participants contribute to positive experiences of trial participation and ultimately to the generation of the robust knowledge.
- Research Ethics
- Informed Consent
Statistics from Altmetric.com
If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.
Read the full text or download the PDF:
Other content recommended for you
- Decision aids for randomised controlled trials: a qualitative exploration of stakeholders’ views
- Relative importance of informational items in participant information leaflets for trials: a Q-methodology approach
- Experiences of trial participants and site staff of participating in and running a large randomised trial within fertility (the endometrial scratch trial): a qualitative interview study
- Cross-sectional assessment of patient attitudes towards participation in clinical trials: does making results publicly available matter?
- Conducting an ongoing HIV clinical trial during the COVID-19 pandemic in Uganda: a qualitative study of research team and participants’ experiences and lessons learnt
- Oncology patients’ experiences in experimental medicine cancer trials: a qualitative study
- Ethics, human rights and HIV vaccine trials in low-income settings
- ‘It's trying to manage the work’: a qualitative evaluation of recruitment processes within a UK multicentre trial
- Understanding parents’ decision-making on participation in clinical trials in children’s heart surgery: a qualitative study
- Methods to improve recruitment to randomised controlled trials: Cochrane systematic review and meta-analysis