ADC

HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH REGISTER
[Advanced]

The most recent version of this article was published on 1 May 2008

Arch Dis Child. Published Online First: 18 December 2007. doi:10.1136/adc.2007.118299
Copyright © 2007 BMJ Publishing Group Ltd & Royal College of Paediatrics and Child Health

This Article
Right arrow Full Text (Rapid PDF)
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
adc.2007.118299v1
93/5/379    most recent
Right arrow Submit a response
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when eLetters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this link to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in ADC Online
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Add article to my folders
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by John, T. M
Right arrow Articles by Pollard, A. J
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by John, T. M
Right arrow Articles by Pollard, A. J

Original articles

Children's consent and paediatric research; is it appropriate for healthy children to be the decision-maker in clinical research?

Tessa M John 1*, Tony Hope 1, Julian Savulescu 1, Alan Stein 1 and Andrew J Pollard 1

1 University of Oxford, United Kingdom

* To whom correspondence should be addressed. E-mail: tessa.john{at}paediatrics.ox.ac.uk.

Accepted 30 November 2007


*   Abstract

Aim: To determine the appropriateness of asking healthy children to make a decision regarding participation in a research study

Methods: Participants constituted a group of children taking part in a follow-up to a vaccine study which involved a blood test to look at the persistence of antibodies. Information about the study was given to each child and following venepuncture an oral questionnaire was completed to establish understanding of the vaccine study. Parental views concerning their child’s ability to make a decision regarding research participation were also sought.

Results: 73 children participated overall. Following venepuncture 59% (n=43) had grasped some aspect of the reasoning behind venepuncture with 33% (n=24) unclear. The majority of parents (n=55) and a substantial number of children (n=28) believed that the parent should make the decision about study participation, though it is clear that a significant minority of parents thought it is right to involve the child in that process.

Conclusion: New guidance about the requirements for informed consent involving children in research is needed, that can respect the autonomy of the child and the role of the parent, whilst recognising the limited capacity of some children to understand age-appropriate information.


Keywords: assent, children, consent, dissent, research







HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH REGISTER
ARCH DIS CHILD FETAL NEONATAL ED ED PRACTICE
Terms and conditions relating to subscriptions purchased online  ¦  Website terms and conditions  ¦  Privacy policy
Copyright © 2007 BMJ Publishing Group Ltd & Royal College of Paediatrics and Child Health