Search

Canine cognitive dysfunction (CCD) is a form of dementia that shares many similarities with Alzheimer’s disease. Given that physical activity is believed to reduce risk of Alzheimer’s disease in humans, we explored the association between physical activity and cognitive health in a cohort of companion dogs, aged 6–18 years. We hypothesized that higher levels of physical activity would be associated with lower (i.e., better) scores on a cognitive dysfunction rating instrument and lower prevalence of dementia, and that this association would be robust when controlling for age, comorbidities, and other potential confounders. Our sample included 11,574 companion dogs enrolled through the Dog Aging Project, of whom 287 had scores over the clinical threshold for CCD. In this observational, cross-sectional study, we used owner-reported questionnaire data to quantify dog cognitive health (via a validated scale), physical activity levels, health conditions, training history, and dietary supplements. We fit regression models with measures of cognitive health as the outcome, and physical activity—with several important covariates—as predictors. We found a significant negative relationship between physical activity and current severity of cognitive dysfunction symptoms (estimate = − 0.10, 95% CI: − 0.11 to − 0.08, p

Research ethics oversight systems have traditionally emphasized the informed consent process as the primary means by which to demonstrate respect for prospective subjects. Yet how researchers can best fulfill the ethical obligations of respect for persons in pragmatic clinical trials (PCTs)-particularly those that may alter or waive informed consent-remains unknown. We propose eight dimensions of demonstrating respect in PCTs: (1) engaging patients and communities in research design and execution, (2) promoting transparency and open communication, (3) maximizing agency, (4) minimizing burdens and promoting accessibility, (5) protecting privacy and confidentiality, (6) valuing interpersonal interactions with clinicians and study team members, (7) providing compensation, and (8) maximizing social value. While what respect requires in the context of PCTs will vary based on the nature of the PCT in question, the breadth of these dimensions demonstrates that respect obligations extend beyond informed consent processes.

Underserved patients face substantial barriers to receiving cancer genetic services. The Cancer Health Assessments Reaching Many (CHARM) study evaluated ways to increase access to genetic testing for individuals in underserved populations at risk for hereditary cancer syndromes (HCS). Here, we report the successful implementation of CHARM in a low-resource environment and the development of sustainable processes to continue genetic risk assessment in this setting. The research team involved key clinical personnel and patient advisors at Denver Health to provide input on study methods and materials. Through iterative and collaborative stakeholder engagement, the team identified barriers and developed solutions that would both facilitate participation in CHARM and be feasible to implement and sustain long term in clinical care. With a focus on infrastructure building, educational modules were developed to increase awareness among referring providers, and standard methods of identifying and managing HCS patients were implemented in the electronic medical record. Three hundred sixty-four DH patients successfully completed the risk assessment tool within the study, and we observed a sustained increase in referrals to genetics for HCS (from 179 in 2017 to 427 in 2021 post-intervention). Implementation of the CHARM study at a low-resourced safety net health system resulted in sustainable improvements in access to cancer genetic risk assessment and services that continue even after the study ended.Trial registration NCT03426878

Aim: As genomic medicine reaches more diverse populations, there is an increased need for healthcare interpreters who understand and can effectively interpret genomics concepts. Methods: We designed a course for healthcare interpreters on exome sequencing to enhance their preparedness for genomic results disclosure appointments in the Cancer Health Assessments Reaching Many (CHARM) study and beyond. The course was evaluated via pre/post surveys and qualitative interviews. Results: 23 interpreters completed the course; 87% rated it as excellent/very good. Improved pre/post confidence interpreting for genetics appointments was statistically significant; pre/post knowledge was not. Interviews highlighted the need for more discussion time. Conclusion: While the course increased confidence interpreting for exome sequencing results appointments, suggested modifications could enhance knowledge and retention of key concepts.

To retrospectively explore the perspectives of parents of children with severe neurological impairment (SNI), such as those with severe cerebral palsy, epilepsy syndromes, and structural brain differences, on clinician counseling regarding home mechanical ventilation (HMV).Inductive thematic analysis was performed on data from telephone interviews with parents who chose for and against HMV for their child with SNI at three academic children's hospitals across the USA.Twenty-six parents/legal guardians of 24 children were interviewed. Fourteen children had static encephalopathy, 11 received HMV, and 20 were alive at the time of parent interviews. Themes included how HMV related to the child's prognosis, risk of death, and integration with goals of care. Although clinicians voiced uncertainty about how HMV would impact their child, parents felt this was coupled with prescriptive/intimidating examples about the child's end of life and judgments about the child's quality of life.While prognositc uncertainty exists, this study suggests that parents of children with SNI seek clinician counseling about HMV that considers their goals of care and views on their child's quality of life.

When incentives are offered to parents and their children to partake in research, there are concerns that parents may be unduly influenced by the incentives, and the children may be exploited. We present a case from a low- and middle-income country and consider the ethical issues that arise when the children are asked to participate in a multinational, double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trial of the effects of a nutritional supplement on growth. The first commenter, from Malaysia, notes that their residents might not share Americans’ expectations regarding children’s role in the consent process from a cultural perspective, which may alter the analysis of the concerns. The authors of the second commentary emphasize the use of incentives that benefit the child participant rather than their parent or are provided directly to the child participant to address the concerns. The third commentator discusses the importance of minimizing the study’s risks and balancing the benefits and the risks, which attenuates the concerns.

Objective Research recruitment through patient portals (ie, patient-facing, web-based clinical interfaces) has the potential to be effective, efficient, and inclusive, but best practices remain undefined. We sought to better understand how patients view this recruitment approach. Materials and Methods We conducted 6 focus groups in Atlanta, GA and Seattle, WA with members of patient advisory committees and the general public. Discussions addressed acceptability of patient portal recruitment and communication preferences. Focus groups were audio-recorded, transcribed, and analyzed using deductive and inductive codes. Iterative team discussions identified major themes. Results Of 49 total participants, 20 were patient advisory committee members. Participants’ mean age was 49 (range 18–74); 59% identified as non-Hispanic White and 31% as Black/African American. Participants were supportive of patient portal recruitment and confident that messages were private and legitimate. Participants identified transparency and patient control over whether and how to participate as essential features. Concerns included the frequency of research messages and the ability to distinguish between research and clinical messages. Participants also discussed how patient portal recruitment might affect diversity and inclusion. Discussion Focus group participants generally found patient portal recruitment acceptable and perceived it as secure and trustworthy. Transparency, control, and attention to inclusiveness were identified as key considerations for developing best practices. Conclusion For institutions implementing patient portal recruitment programs, continued engagement with patient populations can help facilitate translation of these findings into best practices and ensure that implemented strategies accomplish intended goals.

PURPOSE: People report experiencing value from learning genomic results even in the absence of clinically actionable information. Such personal utility has emerged as a key concept in genomic medicine. The lack of a validated patient-reported outcome measure of personal utility has impeded the ability to assess this concept among those receiving genomic results and evaluate the patient-perceived value of genomics. We aimed to construct and psychometrically evaluate a scale to measure personal utility of genomic results-the Personal Utility (PrU) scale. METHODS: We used an evidence-based, operational definition of personal utility, with data from a systematic literature review and Delphi survey to build a novel scale. After piloting with 24 adults, the PrU was administered to healthy adults in a Clinical Sequencing Evidence-Generating Research Consortium study after receiving results. We investigated the responses using exploratory factor analysis. RESULTS: The exploratory factor analysis (N = 841 participants) resulted in a 3-factor solution, accounting for 74% of the variance in items: (1) self-knowledge (α = 0.92), (2) reproductive planning (α = 0.89), and (3) practical benefits (α = 0.91). CONCLUSION: Our findings support the use of the 3-factor PrU to assess personal utility of genomic results. Validation of the PrU in other samples will be important for more wide-spread application.

Toward the end of a routine check-in appointment with your young patient-a 3-year-old boy recently diagnosed with autism spectrum disorder (ASD)-his mother shares concerns about his infant sister, currently 6 months old. The mother is aware that her daughter is at increased risk for ASD. She requests a magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) scan of her infant's brain, based on research she has read showing that MRI can be used to predict which infants will go on to develop ASD. The mother communicates that she is eager to know whether her daughter is going to develop autism so that she and her husband can prepare financially, and so she can place her daughter on the long waitlist for autism-specific services in her local community. As this family's psychiatrist, how should you respond to her request?

OBJECTIVES To evaluate potential consequences of expanded carrier screening (ECS) for reproductive risk on health care utilization among women who are not at increased reproductive risk. STUDY DESIGN Women planning pregnancy were randomized to usual care carrier screening or ECS to assess reproductive risks. Electronic health record (EHR) data were used to evaluate the effects of ECS on pregnancy-related utilization and general health care utilization among all study participants who did not receive positive ECS results of at least a 25% risk (ie, received negative [normal] ECS results). METHODS EHR data were extracted through research-ready databases and extensive chart review for 304 participants. We analyzed the effect of ECS for women who were not found to be at increased reproductive risk on (1) utilization of mental health services in the period between randomization and initial results disclosure; (2) utilization of general outpatient and inpatient services, specialty services, and mental health-related services in the year following randomization; and (3) utilization and refusal of pregnancy-related services among pregnant women (n = 129) prior to and following randomization. RESULTS No significant differences in health care utilization were found between women randomized to receive ECS and those receiving usual care. Women who received negative ECS results did not refuse recommended screening for conditions that are not identified via ECS at a higher rate than women in the usual care arm. CONCLUSIONS These results suggest that ECS does not have unintended negative impacts on the health care system for the majority of patients who are not at increased reproductive risk.

OBJECTIVES To explore the family experience of home ventilation through a comparison of anticipated home life changes with subsequent experiences. STUDY DESIGN Guided interviews with parents across three states who chose home ventilation for their child within the last 5 years. PATIENT-SUBJECT SELECTION Purposive sampling of parents who chose home ventilation for their child within the last 5 years. METHODS Interviews were transcribed for qualitative analysis and analyzed for thematic saturation and prevalence of codes. RESULTS Twenty families were interviewed. Families generally reported not considering potential home life changes when facing the decision about home ventilation; instead, they worried most about medical management. These concerns reversed in importance later. Families learned medical management quickly but felt largely unprepared for the extensive changes to their home life, including isolation, altered relationships with extended family and community, effects on siblings, financial strain, and need for physical changes to their house. Families had not anticipated how much they would be affected by home healthcare as a new part of their life. CONCLUSIONS The priorities that families consider during decisions about pediatric home ventilation may not be aligned with the actual home experience of this technology. Given that the success of home ventilation largely rests with the family's care, family expectations for home life adaptations must be augmented, as should postdischarge supports for families with complex home care experiences.

Openness about identity as lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer, and other sexual orientations and gender identities (LGBTQ+) may cause strain on relationships between family members, which could lead to limited knowledge of cancer family history and reduced communication with family members. As a result, members of the LGBTQ+ community may have more difficulty accessing genetic counseling services for inherited cancer risk. We applied a mixed-methods approach to explore potential barriers to knowledge of cancer family history and family communication among participants of the Cancer Health Assessments Reaching Many (CHARM) study who self-identified as LGBTQ+. We assessed perceptions of family functioning and communication of genetic test results to family members using survey tools and supplemented these data with 20 in-depth interviews to further assess participant perspectives and experiences. LGBTQ+ participants were more likely to report unhealthy family functioning on the survey tool, and some interviewees endorsed that openness about their LGBTQ+ identity led to strained family relationships and reduced communication about their family history of cancer. Overall, this study identified barriers that may be faced by members of the LGBTQ+ community which could limit their ability to access genetic counseling services for inherited cancer risk.

Osteoarthritis (OA) is one of the most prevalent age-related chronic conditions that afflict companion dogs, and multiple joint supplements are available to prevent or treat OA, though the efficacy of these treatments is controversial. While the demographic factors that are associated with OA diagnosis are well established, the factors that are associated with joint supplement use are not as well studied. Using data collected from the Dog Aging Project, we analyzed owner survey responses regarding joint supplement administration and OA diagnosis for 26,951 adult dogs. In this cross-sectional analysis, logistic regression models and odds-ratios (OR) were employed to determine demographic factors of dogs and their owners that were associated with joint supplement administration. Forty percent of adult dogs in our population were given some type of joint supplement. Perhaps not surprisingly, dogs of older age, larger size, and those that were ever overweight were more likely to receive a joint supplement. Younger owner age, urban living, owner education, and feeding commercial dry food were associated with a reduced likelihood of administration of joint supplements to dogs. Interestingly, mixed breed dogs were also less likely to be administered a joint supplement (OR: 0.73). Dogs with a clinical diagnosis of OA were more likely to receive a joint supplement than those without a reported OA diagnosis (OR: 3.82). Neutered dogs were more likely to have a diagnosis of OA, even after controlling for other demographic factors, yet their prevalence of joint supplement administration was the same as intact dogs. Overall, joint supplement use appears to be high in our large population of dogs in the United States. Prospective studies are needed to determine if joint supplements are more commonly administered as a preventative for OA or after an OA clinical diagnosis.

INTRODUCTION: The Cancer Health Assessments Reaching Many study seeks to reduce disparities in genomic care. Two patient advisory committees (PACs) were formed, 1 of English speakers and 1 of Spanish speakers, to vet study processes and materials. Stakeholder engagement in research is relatively new, and we know little about how stakeholders view their engagement. We wanted to learn how patient stakeholders viewed the process, to inform future patient engagement efforts. METHODS: Patients at 2 study sites were invited to serve on 2 PACs. We used an iterative engagement process to solicit and incorporate patient feedback. Much of the PAC feedback on study materials and processes was incorporated. Using surveys and exit interviews, we evaluated stakeholders’ experiences as PAC members. RESULTS: Nearly all PAC members felt satisfied and included in the study decisions, but surveys and exit interviews suggested the need to improve communications. DISCUSSION: Although most believed their feedback was used, and most felt included in study decisions, some said they did not know whether their opinions were used to modify materials or approaches. This suggests the need to explain to patient stakeholders the extent to which their feedback was used and to inform them about the impact that other stakeholders, such as institutional review boards, have on decisions. CONCLUSION: Our evaluation highlights the value of dedicating resources to stakeholder engagement. Although gathering patient feedback on study materials and processes introduced time constraints and complexity to our study, adaptations to materials and processes furthered study goals.

The Radiation Effects Research Foundation (RERF) is the primary organization in Japan dedicated to studying the health consequences of the Hiroshima and Nagasaki atomic bombings in World War II. In December 2020, RERF held a virtual international workshop on the ethical, legal and social implications (ELSI) of genome studies. In this workshop, the ELSI considerations of future human genome studies on radiation research including atomic bomb survivors and their families were discussed. Since genome sequencing (GS) is now practical and affordable, RERF now plans GS of parents/child trios to examine genetic effects of atomic bomb radiation. As such studies may engender some novel risks and benefits, ethics review and engagement with families (including consent) need to be considered. These include protection of individual privacy, use of samples from deceased prior participants, return of results to the participants, public sharing of genome data and advance science and social welfare. Specifically with regard to social welfare, the results of such studies may have implications for public and government decision-making regarding social benefits of victims and other important questions. Based on these broad-ranging discussions we have developed the following concepts to guide this work: “trust,” “compromise” and “relationship building,” inclusive of the concerned stakeholders, scientific aims and Japanese society at large. We conclude that in order to realize, establish and maintain these concepts, it is essential to put procedures into place to ensure the successful, consensus-based implementation of the RERF studies.

Objective To describe the training and early implementation of the ARIA model of genetic counseling (Accessible, Relational, Inclusive, Actionable). Methods As part of the Cancer Health Assessments Reaching Many (CHARM) study, an interdisciplinary workgroup developed the ARIA curriculum and trained genetic counselors to return exome sequencing results using the ARIA model. Curriculum The ARIA curriculum includes didactic elements, discussion, readings, role plays, and observations of usual care genetic counseling sessions. The ARIA model provides the skills and strategies needed for genetic counseling to be accessible to all patients, regardless of prior knowledge or literacy level; involves appropriate psychological and social counseling without overwhelming the patient with information; and leaves the patient with clear and actionable next steps. Conclusion With sufficient training and practice, the ARIA model appears to be feasible, with promise for ensuring that genetic counselors’ communication is accessible, relational, inclusive and actionable for the diverse patients participating in genomic medicine. Practice implications ARIA offers a coherent set of principles and strategies for effective communication with patients of all literacy levels and outlines specific techniques to practice and incorporate these skills into routine practice. The ARIA model could be integrated into genetic counseling training programs and practice, making genetic counseling more accessible and meaningful for all patients.

Lynch syndrome (LS) is the most common inherited cause of colorectal and endometrial cancers. Identifying individuals at risk for LS without personal cancer history requires detailed collection and assessment of family health history. However, barriers exist to family health history collection, especially in historically underserved populations. To improve LS risk assessment in historically underserved populations, we adapted the provider-facing PREdiction Model for gene Mutations (PREMM5™ model), a validated LS risk assessment model, into a patient-facing electronic application through an iterative development process involving expert and patient stakeholders. We report on preliminary findings based on the first 500 individuals exposed to the adapted application in a primary care population enriched for low-literacy and low-resource patients. Major adaptations to the PREMM5™ provider module included reduction in reading level, addition of interactive literacy aids, incorporation of family history assessment for both maternal and paternal sides of the family, and inclusion of questions about individual relatives or small groups of relatives to reduce cognitive burden. In the first 500 individuals, 90% completed the PREMM5™ independently; of those, 94% did so in 5 min or less (ranged from 0.2 to 48.8 min). The patient-facing application was able to accurately classify 84% of patients as having clinically significant or not clinically significant LS risk. Our preliminary results suggest that in this diverse study population, most participants were able to rapidly, accurately, and independently complete an interactive application collecting family health history assessment that accurately assessed for Lynch syndrome risk.

The changing clinical research recruitment landscape involves practical challenges but introduces opportunities. Researchers can now identify large numbers of eligible patients through electronic health record review and can directly contact those who have authorized contact. Applying behavioral science-driven strategies to design and frame communication could affect patients' willingness to authorize contact and their understanding of these programs. The ethical and practical implications of various strategies warrant empirical evaluation.We conducted an online survey (Compared to the neutral flyer, individuals who received the positive text flyer were numerically more likely to enroll, but this was not statistically significant (24.2% v. 19.0%,This study demonstrated that employing behavioral science-driven communication strategies for authorization for research contact had an effect on likelihood of hypothetical enrollment but did not significantly affect comprehension. Strategies using simple, positive language and visual tools may be effective and ethically appropriate. Further studies should explore how these and other approaches can help to optimize research recruitment.

Given the dearth of established safe and effective interventions to respond to COVID-19, there is an urgent ethical imperative to conduct meaningful clinical research. The good news is that interventions to be tested are not in short supply. Unfortunately, the human and material resources needed to conduct these trials are finite. It is essential that trials be robust and meet enrollment targets and that lower-quality studies not be permitted to displace higher-quality studies, delaying answers to critical questions. Yet, with few exceptions, existing research review bodies and processes are not designed to ensure these conditions are satisfied. To meet this challenge, we offer guidance for research institutions about how to ethically consolidate and prioritize COVID-19 clinical trials, while recognizing that consolidation and prioritization should also take place upstream (among manufacturers and funders) and at a higher level (e.g. nationally). In our proposed three-stage process, trials must first meet threshold criteria. Those that do are evaluated in a second stage to determine whether the institution has sufficient capacity to support all proposed trials. If it does not, the third stage entails evaluating studies against two additional sets of comparative prioritization criteria: those specific to the study and those that aim to advance diversification of an institution’s research portfolio. To implement these criteria fairly, we propose that research institutions form COVID-19 research prioritization committees. We briefly discuss some important attributes of these committees, drawing on the authors’ experiences at our respective institutions. Although we focus on clinical trials of COVID-19 therapeutics, our guidance should prove useful for other kinds of COVID-19 research, as well as non-pandemic research, which can raise similar challenges due to the scarcity of research resources.

We conducted an online experimental survey to evaluate attitudes toward an authorization for contact (AFC) program allowing researchers to contact patients about studies based on electronic record review. A total of 1070 participants were randomly assigned to 1 of 3 flyers varying in design and framing. Participants were asked to select concerns about and reasons for signing up for AFC. Logistic regression and latent class analysis were conducted. The most commonly selected concerns included needing more information (43%), privacy (40%), and needing more time to think (28%). A minority were not interested in participating in research (16%) and did not want to be bothered (15%). Latent class analysis identified clusters with specific concerns about privacy, lack of interest in research, and not wanting to be bothered. A novel flyer with simple and positive framing was associated with lower odds of both not wanting to be bothered (P = .01) and not being interested in research (P = .01). Many concerns about AFC programs appear nonspecific. Addressing privacy, lack of interest in research, and not wanting to be bothered warrant further study as ways to enhance recruitment.

BACKGROUND: Clinical genomic implementation studies pose challenges for informed consent. Consent forms often include complex language and concepts, which can be a barrier to diverse enrollment, and these studies often blur traditional research-clinical boundaries. There is a move toward self-directed, web-based research enrollment, but more evidence is needed about how these enrollment approaches work in practice. In this study, we developed and evaluated a literacy-focused, web-based consent approach to support enrollment of diverse participants in an ongoing clinical genomic implementation study. METHODS: As part of the Cancer Health Assessments Reaching Many (CHARM) study, we developed a web-based consent approach that featured plain language, multimedia, and separate descriptions of clinical care and research activities. CHARM offered clinical exome sequencing to individuals at high risk of hereditary cancer. We interviewed CHARM participants about their reactions to the consent approach. We audio recorded, transcribed, and coded interviews using a deductively and inductively derived codebook. We reviewed coded excerpts as a team to identify overarching themes. RESULTS: We conducted 32 interviews, including 12 (38%) in Spanish. Most (69%) enrolled without assistance from study staff, usually on a mobile phone. Those who completed enrollment in one day spent an average of 12 minutes on the consent portion. Interviewees found the information simple to read but comprehensive, were neutral to positive about the multimedia support, and identified increased access to testing in the study as the key difference from clinical care. CONCLUSIONS: This study showed that interviewees found our literacy-focused, web-based consent approach acceptable; did not distinguish the consent materials from other online study processes; and valued getting access to testing in the study. Overall, conducting empirical bioethics research in an ongoing clinical trial was useful to demonstrate the acceptability of our novel consent approach but posed practical challenges.

A central tension in pediatric research ethics arises from our desire to protect children from harm while also allowing progress toward discoveries that could improve child health. A prime example of this tension is research on a controversial yet increasingly common practice: the use of cannabis by women to treat nausea and vomiting of pregnancy. Studies of cannabis use in pregnancy face a combination of ethical hurdles because of the inclusion of pregnant women and involvement of a schedule I controlled substance. Given the growing need for research on the safety and efficacy of cannabis for nausea and vomiting of pregnancy, we reflect on the multiple historical contexts that have contributed to the challenge of studying cannabis use during pregnancy and make a case for the ethical rationale for such research.

Purpose As new genetic services become available, their implementation in safety-net settings must be studied. Methods We interviewed stakeholders (patients and primary care clinicians) from federally qualified health centers to discuss the utility, acceptability, and priority of new genetic services. We presented scenarios tailored for each audience describing carrier testing, diagnostic testing for a developmental delay, and hereditary cancer syndrome testing. We summarized transcripts using the framework method and compared patient and clinician perspectives. Results Clinicians questioned the relevance and priority of genetic services. Hereditary cancer testing was perceived most favorably by clinicians, who focused on actionability, cost, and access to downstream care. Patients stated that access to genetic services was important and that there should be parity across safety-net and higher-resourced settings. Conclusions Genetic services with clear clinical impact are more acceptable to clinicians in safety-net clinics. Clinicians may be underestimating patients' interest in expanded genetic services.

Stepped-wedge cluster randomized trial (SW-CRT) designs are increasingly employed in pragmatic research; they differ from traditional parallel cluster randomized trials in which an intervention is delivered to a subset of clusters, but not to all. In a SW-CRT, all clusters receive the intervention under investigation by the end of the study. This approach is thought to avoid ethical concerns about the denial of a desired intervention to participants in control groups. Such concerns have been cited in the literature as a primary motivation for choosing SW-CRT design, however SW-CRTs raise additional ethical concerns related to the delayed implementation of an intervention and consent. Yet, PCT investigators may choose SW-CRT designs simply because they are concerned that other study designs are infeasible. In this paper, we examine justifications for the use of SW-CRT study design, over other designs, by drawing on the experience of the National Institutes of Health's Health Care Systems Research Collaboratory (NIH Collaboratory) with five pragmatic SW-CRTs. We found that decisions to use SW-CRT design were justified by practical and epistemic reasons rather than ethical ones. These include concerns about feasibility, the heterogeneity of cluster characteristics, and the desire for simultaneous clinical evaluation and implementation. In this paper we compare the potential benefits of SW-CRTs against the ethical and epistemic challenges brought forth by the design and suggest that the choice of SW-CRT design must balance epistemic, feasibility and ethical justifications. Moreover, given their complexity, such studies need rigorous and informed ethical oversight.

Covid-19 raised many novel ethical issues including regarding the allocation of opportunities to participate in clinical trials during a public health emergency. In this article, we explore how hospitals that have a scarcity of trial opportunities, either overall or in a specific trial, can equitably allocate those opportunities in the context of an urgent medical need with limited therapeutic interventions. We assess the three main approaches to allocating trial opportunities discussed in the literature: patient choice, physician referral, and randomization/lottery. As, we argue, none of the three typical approaches are ethically ideal for allocating trial opportunities in the pandemic context, many hospitals have instead implemented hybrid solutions. We offer practical guidance to support those continuing to face these challenges, and we analyze options for the future.