This blog is closed to new posts due to inactivity. The post remains here as part of the network’s archive of useful research information. We hope you'll join the conversation by posting to an open topic or starting a new one.
When sites seek our advice (or ask our opinion as monitors) about whether they should steer clear of including vulnerable populations in their studies, what shall we say? Should we give them the opinion that there are a number of regulations and guidelines in place that may make working with a vulnerable population group challenging and time-consuming, should we give the opinion that these population groups can assist us in our research as much, or more, than the general population and that those regulations and guidelines are put in place more to protect the vulnerable populations, and not to prevent them from participating in research. The regulations exist to ensure that these groups of people are not exploited or put at unfair risk, and to enable their participation in the development of potentially life-saving or quality-of-life improving drugs or treatments.
So, vulnerable populations; what do the regulations tell us? We can all hazard a guess that this includes children, prisoners, pregnant women, handicapped or mentally disabled persons per the 21 CFR 56.107 and 45 CFR 46.107.In addition to the above, 45 CFR 46 includes economically or educationally disadvantaged persons.
In addition to the regulations above though, it is also necessary to take into account that a number of guidelines exist and it may be required, or it may be a matter of best practice, for these to be followed. Take a look at the Belmont Report, ICH-GCP, CIOMS and the Declaration of Helsinki for a more detailed view.
Once again, there is more; depending on what country you live in, it may be necessary to take into account local country regulations or guidelines. Let us use South Africa as an example; South African Good Clinical Practice (SA-GCP) includes a more extensive list of groups that they consider to be vulnerable.
Now that we have done a fly-by visit of which regulations and guidelines we need to consider, what do we do once we have made the decision to include one or more vulnerable population in our research study? Like most aspects of research, there is no single solution for all groups. Your decision on how to act has to be based on our discussions above as well as on your protocol and of course, which population group you are dealing with.
Keep watching this space; over the next few weeks, I will be posting snippets about some obvious and some easy to forget tips when dealing with illiteracy; pregnant women/foetuses and neonates; prisoners; children and immature or mentally incompetent persons; and please, do let me know the challenges you are facing, or the strategies you have implemented to assist in overcoming these challenges. And finally, I wouldn’t want to give everything away, but watch out for further ponderings on the term within SA-GCP; and what those could be, and what challenges those may bring.
-
A few thoughts on literacy.....
Although this population is not defined by the regulations, literacy still poses a common consenting challenge.
A few simple ways of identifying illiterate participants;
After reading the ICF to the participant - Assess comprehension of the materials that were presented by asking a few questions directly from the content.
When in doubt, consider asking the potential participant to read a portion of the consent document out loud – look to see if they have the consent document upside down etc.
Test writing skills to see if the participant is writing letters upside down, facing the wrong way etc.A short written consent document stating that the elements of informed consent, as required by 21 CFR Part 50 Section 50.25, may be presented verbally to the “subject or the subject’s legally authorized representative.” When this method is used, there must be a witness to the oral presentation. Also, the IRB/EC must approve a written summary of what will be presented (verbal and/or written information) to the “subject or legal representative”. Only the short form needs to be signed by the “subject or the legal representative.” However, the witness signs both the short form and a copy of the written summary. The clinical site person actually obtaining the consent must sign a copy of the written summary.
-
For those of you who may be based in South Africa, or who may have sites located in South Africa, I mentioned an additional list of vulnerable populations, per SA-GCP (2006) Section 2.3;
Children and Adolescents
Pregnant Women
Foetuses in utero
Foetuses ex utero, Including Nonviable Foetuses
Prisoners
People with Mental Disabilities or Substance Abuse Related Disorders
Vulnerable CommunitiesOther Special Groups include;
Traumatised and comatose patients
Terminally ill patients
Elderly or aged patients
Minorities
Students
EmployeesEthics committees must ensure special consideration is given to all these groups, particularly around informed consent.
SA-GCP Section 2.3 also states that in terms of the types of research, "this includes research involving collectives, research involving indigenous medical systems, emergency care research, research involving innovative therapy / intervention, research involving vulnerable communities, and also HIV / AIDS clinical and epidemiological research".
-
Dear Nicci,
This is very informative and in my opinion would be very useful for the Clinical research sites. Looking forward to your next post:-)
-
Dear Nicci
Thank you for your interesting post. This is something I am very interested to learn more about so I am looking forward to your future posts!
Thank you.