Opinions of Children about Participation in Medical Genetic Researchvan der Pal S.a · Sozanska B.b · Madden D.c · Kosmeda A.b · Debinska A.b · Danielewicz H.b · Boznanski A.b · Detmar S.a
aTNO Quality of Life, Prevention and Health, Youth Department, Leiden, The Netherlands; bDepartment of Pediatrics and Allergology, Wroclaw Medical University, Wroclaw, Poland; cFaculty of Law, University College Cork, Cork, Ireland
Do you have an account?
- Rent for 48h to view
- Buy Cloud Access for unlimited viewing via different devices
- Synchronizing in the ReadCube Cloud
- Printing and saving restrictions apply
Rental: USD 8.50
Cloud: USD 20.00
Aims: The objective was to evaluate children’s opinions about their participation in a large research project. Methods: Polish children between 6 and 14 years of age completed a questionnaire about their participation in the Polish Gabriel study (which aims to identify genetic and environmental causes of asthma). In total 706 questionnaires were collected. Results: Children’s main motivation for participation was wanting to know whether they were healthy or not. Most children could think of no reasons to reconsider participation. Children aged 6–10 years might reconsider participating because they did not know what was going to happen. A third of the children were not informed by anybody about the study. Especially the youngest children indicated a need for a tailored letter (42%). The youngest children were less often asked for their opinion about participation. All children preferred that both parents and children are asked for consent or assent. Children who were not informed or not asked for their opinion seemed less emotionally involved in the study. Conclusion: While researchers and parents tend to focus their information provision to older children and include them in decision-making, especially the younger children expressed a need for more tailored information and involvement in their participation in research.
© 2010 S. Karger AG, Basel
- Alderson P: Competent children? Minors’ consent to health care treatment and research. Soc Sci Med 2007;65:2272–2283.
- Royal College of Paediatrics and Child Health Ethics Advisory Committee: Guidelines for the ethical conduct of medical research involving children. Arch Dis Child 2000;82:177–182.
Medical Research Council Ethics Guide: Medical research involving children. 2004. Available at http://www.mrc.ac.uk/Utilities/Documentrecord/index.htm?d= MRC002430.
- American Society of Human Genetics and American College of Medical Genetics: Points to consider: ethical, legal and psychosocial implications of genetic testing in children and adolescents. Am J Hum Genet 1995;57:1233–1241.
Forrest L, Madden D: The genetic testing of children: ethical, legal and social implications. Gabriel Legal Report, University College Cork, 2007.
- Wendler DS: Assent in paediatric research: theoretical and practical considerations. J Med Ethics 2006;32:229–234.
- Wendler DS, Shah S: Should children decide whether they are enrolled in nonbeneficial research? Am J Bioeth 2003;3:1–7.
- Weithorn LA, Campbell SB: The competency of children and adolescents to make informed treatment decisions. Child Dev 1982;53:1589–1598.
- Jonsen AR: Research involving children: recommendations of the National Commission for the Protection of Human Subjects of Biomedical and Behavioral Research. Pediatrics 1978;62:131–136.
- Robertson S, Savulescu J: Is there a case in favour of predictive genetic testing in young children? Bioethics 2001;15:26–49.
- Ross LF: Predictive genetic testing for conditions that present in childhood. Kennedy Inst Ethics J 2002;12:225–244.
Stevenson DA, Strasburger VC: Advise or consent? Issues in genetic testing of adolescents. Adolesc Med 2002;13:213–221.
GABRIEL (A multidisciplinary study to identify the genetic and environmental causes of asthma in the European Community) contract number 018996 under the Integrated Program LSH-2004-1.2.5-1, supported by the European Commission. Available at www.gabriel-fp6.org.
- Wolthers OD: A questionnaire on factors influencing children’s assent and dissent to non-therapeutic research. J Med Ethics 2006;32:292–297.
Bernhardt BA, Tambor ES, Fraser G, Wissow LS, Geller G: Parents’ and children’s attitudes toward the enrollment of minors in genetic susceptibility research: implications for informed consent. Am J Med Genet A 2003;116:315–323.
- Irwig L, McCaffery K, Salkeld G, Bossuyt P: Informed choice for screening: implications for evaluation. BMJ 2006;332:1148–1150.
Burke W, Diekema DS: Ethical issues arising from the participation of children in genetic research. J Pediatr 2006;149(suppl 1):34–38.
Article / Publication Details
Copyright / Drug Dosage / DisclaimerCopyright: All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be translated into other languages, reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, microcopying, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher.
Drug Dosage: The authors and the publisher have exerted every effort to ensure that drug selection and dosage set forth in this text are in accord with current recommendations and practice at the time of publication. However, in view of ongoing research, changes in government regulations, and the constant flow of information relating to drug therapy and drug reactions, the reader is urged to check the package insert for each drug for any changes in indications and dosage and for added warnings and precautions. This is particularly important when the recommended agent is a new and/or infrequently employed drug.
Disclaimer: The statements, opinions and data contained in this publication are solely those of the individual authors and contributors and not of the publishers and the editor(s). The appearance of advertisements or/and product references in the publication is not a warranty, endorsement, or approval of the products or services advertised or of their effectiveness, quality or safety. The publisher and the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to persons or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content or advertisements.