1. Planning Ahead for Dementia Research Participation: Insights from a Survey of Older Australians and Implications for Ethics, Law and Practice
- Author
-
Rob Sanson-Fisher, Nola M. Ries, and Elise Mansfield
- Subjects
Male ,Health (social science) ,Research Subjects ,media_common.quotation_subject ,education ,Decision Making ,Medical law ,0603 philosophy, ethics and religion ,Altruism ,Ethics, Research ,03 medical and health sciences ,0302 clinical medicine ,Health care ,medicine ,Dementia ,Outpatient clinic ,Humans ,Cognitive Dysfunction ,Mental Competency ,030212 general & internal medicine ,media_common ,Aged ,Informed Consent ,business.industry ,Health Policy ,Australia ,06 humanities and the arts ,Middle Aged ,medicine.disease ,Cognitive test ,Cross-Sectional Studies ,Law ,Female ,Applied Ethics ,060301 applied ethics ,Patient Participation ,Psychology ,business ,Advance Directives ,Inclusion (education) ,Blood drawing - Abstract
© 2019, Journal of Bioethical Inquiry Pty Ltd. People with dementia have commonly been excluded from research. The adverse impacts of this exclusion are now being recognized and research literature, position statements, and ethics guidelines increasingly call for inclusion of people with dementia in research. However, few published studies investigate the views of potential participants on taking part in research should they experience dementia-related cognitive impairment. This cross-sectional survey examined the views of people aged sixty and older (n=174) attending hospital outpatient clinics about clinical research participation if they had dementia and impaired decision-making ability. Over 90 percent of respondents were agreeable to participating in a wide range of research activities, such as cognitive testing, physical measurements, imaging procedures, and blood draws. For drug studies, however, agreement dropped to 60 percent. Altruism was a strong motivator for research participation. In regard to who should be involved in decisions about their participation in research during periods of incapacity, respondents mostly preferred the person they appoint as their substitute decision-maker for healthcare matters (88%) or a doctor or health professional on the research team (78%). Over three-quarters (79%) expressed interest in making an advance research directive. The study findings are discussed in relation to law reforms in Australia that aim to strengthen respect and inclusion for people with impaired decision-making capacity, especially by providing frameworks for advance planning for research participation.
- Published
- 2018