Procedural Misconceptions and Informed Consent: Insights from Empirical Research on the Clinical Trials Industry

This paper provides a simultaneously reflexive and analytical framework to think about obstacles to truly informed consent in social science and biomedical research. To do so, it argues that informed consent often goes awry due to procedural misconceptions built into the research context. The concept of procedural misconception is introduced to describe how individuals respond to what is familiar in research settings and overlook what is different. In the context of biomedical research, procedural misconceptions can be seen to function as root causes of therapeutic misconceptions.

[1]  G. F. Judisch,et al.  Informed Consent. Legal Theory and Clinical Practice , 1988 .

[2]  J. Quadagno.  One Nation, Uninsured: Why the U.S. Has No National Health Insurance , 2005 .

[3]  Susan E. Babbitt,et al.  Whose Science? Whose Knowledge? Thinking from Women's Lives. , 1993 .

[4]  C. Grady,et al.  Misunderstanding in clinical research: distinguishing therapeutic misconception, therapeutic misestimation, and therapeutic optimism. , 2003, IRB.

[5]  M. Markman.  What must research subjects be told regarding the results of completed randomized trials? , 2004, IRB.

[6]  Sheldon Zink.  Maybe We Should Pay Them More , 2001 .

[7]  Carl Elliott,et al.  Justice for the Professional Guinea Pig , 2001, The American journal of bioethics : AJOB.

[8]  L. Churchill.  Bioethics in Social Context , 1997 .

[9]  R. Kaplan,et al.  Semantic and Pragmatic Variability in Medical Research Terms: Implications for Obtaining Meaningful Informed Consent , 2000 .

[10]  G. Marcus.  Ethnography through Thick and Thin , 2021 .

[11]  L. Cannold.  “There is no evidence to suggest …”: Changing The Way We Judge Information For Disclosure in the Informed Consent Process , 1997, Hypatia.

[12]  A. Orum.  One Nation, Uninsured: Why the U.S. Has No National Health Insurance , 2007 .

[13]  Charles Weijer,et al.  Informing study participants of research results: an ethical imperative. , 2003, IRB.

[14]  D. Haraway.  Simians, Cyborgs, and Women: The Reinvention of Nature , 1990 .

[15]  G. Henderson,et al.  Beyond regulations : ethics in human subjects research , 1999 .

[16]  J. Fisher.  Co-ordinating 'ethical' clinical trials: the role of research coordinators in the contract research industry. , 2006, Sociology of health & illness.

[17]  F. Ruderman.  Presence in the Flesh: The Body in Medicine , 1998 .

[18]  P. Mcgrath.  Autonomy, discourse, and power: a postmodern reflection on principlism and bioethics. , 1998, The Journal of medicine and philosophy.

[19]  R. Dresser.  Payments to Research Participants: The Importance of Context , 2001, The American journal of bioethics : AJOB.

[20]  R. Zussman.  Sociological Perspectives on Medical Ethics and Decision-Making , 1997 .

[21]  D. Smith.  Institutional Ethnography: A Sociology for People , 2005 .

[22]  L. Eckenwiler.  Moral Reasoning and the Review of Research Involving Human Subjects , 2001, Kennedy Institute of Ethics journal.