SHOULD institutional review boards (IRBs) provide greater oversight and guidance for researchers and research subjects with regard to informed consent for participation in research studies, especially if the subjects' cognitive or affective decisionmaking capacities are diminished? Bonnie1 and Elliott2 each raise this significant question in this issue of the Archives. Bonnie addresses cognitively impaired subjects in general. He advocates a reconsideration of the role of IRBs in assessing the decision-making capacity of all cognitively impaired research subjects. Elliott raises a more specific issue—that of the influence of mood on judgment and on informed consent. The 2 articles may be considered in terms of 4 important issues with regard to medical research: (1) the context of obtaining informed consent, (2) the question of who should make medical decisions regarding clinical care or participation in research, (3) the stigmatization of psychiatric disorders, and (4) the degree of risk to the
Hirschfeld RMA, Winslade W, Krause TL. Protecting Subjects and Fostering Research: Striking the Proper Balance. Arch Gen Psychiatry. 1997;54(2):121–123. doi:10.1001/archpsyc.1997.01830140031005
Browse and subscribe to JAMA Network podcasts!
Customize your JAMA Network experience by selecting one or more topics from the list below.
Create a personal account or sign in to: