Assessing children’s competence to consent in research by a standardized tool: a validity study

BMC Pediatrics

Ramón J L Lindauer²  C Michel Zwaan³  Martine C de Vries⁴  Robert Lindeboom¹  Pieter W Troost²  Irma M Hein² 

[1] Division of Clinical Methods and Public Health, Master Evidence Based Practice, Academic Medical Center Amsterdam, Meibergdreef 9, Amsterdam, 1105, AZ, The Netherlands;Department of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry and de Bascule, Academic Medical Center Amsterdam, Meibergdreef 5, Amsterdam, 1105, AZ, The Netherlands;Department of Pediatric Oncology and Hematology, Erasmus Medical Center Rotterdam, Dr Molewaterplein 60, Rotterdam, 3015, GJ, The Netherlands;Department of Medical Ethics and Health Law, Leiden University Medical Center, PO Box 9600, Leiden, 2300, RC, The Netherlands

关键词: Adolescent;    Child;    Research;    Decision making;    Informed consent;    Drug trial;    Tool;    Assessment;    Consent;    Competence;   

Others  :  1170642
DOI  :  10.1186/1471-2431-12-156

 received in 2012-09-12, accepted in 2012-09-21,  发布年份 2012

【 摘 要 】

Background

Currently over 50% of drugs prescribed to children have not been evaluated properly for use in their age group. One key reason why children have been excluded from clinical trials is that they are not considered able to exercise meaningful autonomy over the decision to participate. Dutch law states that competence to consent can be presumed present at the age of 12 and above; however, in pediatric practice children’s competence is not that clearly presented and the transition from assent to active consent is gradual. A gold standard for competence assessment in children does not exist. In this article we describe a study protocol on the development of a standardized tool for assessing competence to consent in research in children and adolescents.

Methods/design

In this study we modified the MacCAT-CR, the best evaluated competence assessment tool for adults, for use in children and adolescents. We will administer the tool prospectively to a cohort of pediatric patients from 6 to18 years during the selection stages of ongoing clinical trials. The outcomes of the MacCAT-CR interviews will be compared to a reference standard, established by the judgments of clinical investigators, and an expert panel consisting of child psychiatrists, child psychologists and medical ethicists. The reliability, criterion-related validity and reproducibility of the tool will be determined. As MacCAT-CR is a multi-item scale consisting of 13 items, power was justified at 130–190 subjects, providing a minimum of 10–15 observations per item. MacCAT-CR outcomes will be correlated with age, life experience, IQ, ethnicity, socio-economic status and competence judgment of the parent(s). It is anticipated that 160 participants will be recruited over 2 years to complete enrollment.

Discussion

A validity study on an assessment tool of competence to consent is strongly needed in research practice, particularly in the child and adolescent population. In this study we will establish a reference standard of children’s competence to consent, combined with validation of an assessment instrument. Results can facilitate responsible involvement of children in clinical trials by further development of guidelines, health-care policies and legal policies.

【 授权许可】

   
2012 Hein et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.

【 参考文献 】

• [1]Miller VA, Drotar D, Kodish E: Children's competence for assent and consent: a review of empirical findings. Ethics Behav 2004, 14:255-295.
• [2]Beauchamp TL, Childress JF: Principles of Biomedical Ethics. New York, USA: Oxford University Press; 2008.
• [3]Buchanan AE, Brock DW: Deciding for Others: The Ethics of Surrogate Decision Making. Cambridge [U.K.]; New York, N.Y: Cambridge University Press; 1990.
• [4]Witmer JM, de Roode RP: Koninklijke Nederlands Maatschappij tot bevordering van Geneeskunst. Utrecht: Implementatie van de WGBO; 2004. [Van Wet naar Praktijk]
• [5]Altavilla A, Manfredi C, Baiardi P, Dehlinger-Kremer M, Galletti P, Pozuelo AA, et al.: Impact of the new european paediatric regulatory framework on ethics committees: overview and perspectives. Acta Paediatr 2011, 101:27-32.
• [6]Doek JE, Breuker KM, Knibbe CAJ, Offringa M, Passchier J, Steinkamp NL, et al.: Advies Medisch-wetenschappelijk Onderzoek met Kinderen. Den Haag, the Netherlands: Rijksoverheid: Ministerie van Volksgezondheid, Welzijn en Sport; 2009.
• [7]Sokol BW, Chandler MJ, Jones C: From mechanical to autonomous agency: the relationship between children's moral judgments and their developing theories of mind. New Dir Child Adolesc Dev 2004, 103:19-36.
• [8]Mellado Pena MJ, Pineiro PR, Medina Claros AF, Ceci A: Use, implementation and impact of the TEDDY network in Europe. Farm Hosp 2011, 36:109-110.
• [9]Joffe S, Fernandez CV, Pentz RD, Ungar DR, Mathew NA, Turner CW, et al.: Involving children with cancer in decision-making about research participation. J Pediatr 2006, 149:862-868.
• [10]Martenson EK, Fagerskiold AM: A review of children's decision-making competence in health care. J Clin Nurs 2008, 17:3131-3141.
• [11]de Vries MC, Wit JM, Engberts DP, Kaspers GJ, van Leeuwen E: Pediatric oncologists' attitudes towards involving adolescents in decision-making concerning research participation. Pediatr Blood Cancer 2010, 55:123-128.
• [12]de Vries MC, Bresters D, Engberts DP, Wit JM, van Leeuwen E: Attitudes of physicians and parents towards discussing infertility risks and semen cryopreservation with male adolescents diagnosed with cancer. Pediatr Blood Cancer 2009, 53:386-391.
• [13]Billick SB, Edwards JL, Burgert W III, Serlen JR, Bruni SM: A clinical study of competency in child psychiatric inpatients. J Am Acad Psychiatry Law 1998, 26:587-594.
• [14]McAliley LG, Hudson-Barr DC, Gunning RS, Rowbottom LA: The use of advance directives with adolescents. Pediatr Nurs 2000, 26:471-480.
• [15]Weithorn LA, Campbell SB: The competency of children and adolescents to make informed treatment decisions. Child Dev 1982, 53:1589-1598.
• [16]Dunn LB, Nowrangi MA, Palmer BW, Jeste DV, Saks ER: Assessing decisional capacity for clinical research or treatment: a review of instruments. Am J Psychiatry 2006, 163:1323-1334.
• [17]Grisso T, Appelbaum PS, Hill-Fotouhi C: The MacCAT-T: a clinical tool to assess patients' capacities to make treatment decisions. Psychiatr Serv 1997, 48:1415-1419.
• [18]Cairns R, Maddock C, Buchanan A, David AS, Hayward P, Richardson G, et al.: Reliability of mental capacity assessments in psychiatric in-patients. Br J Psychiatry 2005, 187:372-378.
• [19]Appelbaum PS, Grisso T: The MacArthur Competence Assessment Tool for Clinical Research (MacCAT-CR). Sarasota, FL: Professional Resource Press; 2001.
• [20]Van Eyk H, Ouwens MA, Hondius AJK: MacCAT-T, instrument bij de beoordeling van wilsbekwaamheid. Journaal Ggz en recht 2008, 4:53-57.
• [21]Ditters KM: De Nederlandse vertaling van de MacCAT-T: een onderzoek naar de bruikbaarheid ervan in de praktijk. Journaal Ggz en recht 2009, 5:199-204.
• [22]Koelch M, Prestel A, Singer H, Schulze U, Fegert JM: Report of an initial pilot study on the feasibility of using the MacArthur competence assessment tool for clinical research in children and adolescents with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder. J Child Adolesc Psychopharmacol 2010, 20:63-67.
• [23]Tan JO, Hope T: Mental health legislation and decision making capacity: capacity is more complex than it looks. BMJ 2006, 332:119.
• [24]Piaget J: The child's conception of the world. London and New York: K. Paul, Trench, Trubner & co., ltd; 1929.
• [25]DeHart GB, Sroufe LA, Cooper RG: Child Development: It's nature and course. New York, N.Y. (USA): McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc; 2004.
• [26]Larcher V, Hutchinson A: How should paediatricians assess Gillick competence? Arch Dis Child 2010, 95:307-311.
• [27]Broome ME, Allegretti C: Adolescent cancer patients: sperm storage, consent and emotion. Hum Reprod 2001, 16:2473-2475.
• [28]Chappuy H, Doz F, Blanche S, Gentet JC, Treluyer JM: Children's views on their involvement in clinical research. Pediatr Blood Cancer 2008, 50:1043-1046.
• [29]Kodish E, Eder M, Noll RB, Ruccione K, Lange B, Angiolillo A, et al.: Communication of randomization in childhood leukemia trials. JAMA 2004, 291:470-475.
• [30]de Vries MC, van Leeuwen E: [Ethics of medical scientific research: informed consent and the therapeutic misconception]. Ned Tijdschr Geneeskd 2008, 152:679-683.
• [31]Grisso T, Vierling L: Minors' consent to treatment: a developmental perspective. Prof Psychol 1978, 9:412-427.
• [32]Tates K, Elbers E, Meeuwesen L, Bensing J: Doctor-parent–child relationships: a ‘pas de trois’. Patient Educ Couns 2002, 48:5-14.
• [33]Tates K, Meeuwesen L, Elbers E, Bensing J: I've come for his throat': roles and identities in doctor-parent–child communication. Child Care Health Dev 2002, 28:109-116.
• [34]Heij K, Visser W: Schrijven in eenvoudig Nederlands. Den Haag, Netherlands: Sdu Uitgevers; 2006.
• [35]Wechsler D, Naglieri JA: Wechsler Nonverbal Scale of Ability. Amsterdam: Pearson Assessment and Information B.V; 2008.
• [36]Verhelst ND, Glas CAW, Verstralen HHFM: OPLM: One Parameter Logistic Model. Computer program and manual. Arnhem, Netherlands: CITO; 2005.
• [37]Owen GS, Richardson G, David AS, Szmukler G, Hayward P, Hotopf M: Mental capacity to make decisions on treatment in people admitted to psychiatric hospitals: cross sectional study. BMJ 2008, 337:a448.
• [38]Palmer BW, Dunn LB, Appelbaum PS, Mudaliar S, Thal L, Henry R, et al.: Assessment of capacity to consent to research among older persons with schizophrenia, Alzheimer disease, or diabetes mellitus: comparison of a 3-item questionnaire with a comprehensive standardized capacity instrument. Arch Gen Psychiatry 2005, 62:726-733.
• [39]Vollmann J, Bauer A, Danker-Hopfe H, Helmchen H: Competence of mentally ill patients: a comparative empirical study. Psychol Med 2003, 33:1463-1471.
• [40]Kim SY, Appelbaum PS, Kim HM, Wall IF, Bourgeois JA, Frankel B, et al.: Variability of judgments of capacity: experience of capacity evaluators in a study of research consent capacity. Psychosomatics 2011, 52:346-353.