Advance directives in dementia research: The opinions and arguments of clinical researchers − an empirical study

Karin Jongsma*, Suzanne van de Vathorst

*Corresponding author for this work

    Research output: Contribution to journalArticleAcademicpeer-review

    8 Citations (Scopus)

    Abstract

    In order to discover an effective treatment for dementia it is necessary to include dementia patients in clinical research trials. Dementia patients face an increased risk to lose the capacity to consent to research participation, and research possibilities with incompetent participants are legally strictly limited. One solution is for patients to consent to research through an advance research directive (ARD) whilst still competent. In order to explore whether such a directive would be useful and valuable in practice we conducted a qualitative study (13 interviews). We explored the opinions and arguments of researchers in the field of dementia, aiming to map the possibilities and constraints of ARDs. It was argued that a positive ARD could be valuable to discuss research participation with proxies, and patients with a negative ARD will be excluded from research trials. However, it is argued that an ARD cannot replace the informed consent procedure, and in practice proxy dissent will overrule written consent. The practical use of these directives is thus limited, as most researchers will not comply with positive directives.

    Original languageEnglish
    Pages (from-to)4-14
    Number of pages11
    JournalResearch Ethics
    Volume11
    Issue number1
    DOIs
    Publication statusPublished - 1 Mar 2015

    Keywords

    • advance directives
    • dementia
    • informed consent
    • research ethics
    • vulnerable populations

    Fingerprint

    Dive into the research topics of 'Advance directives in dementia research: The opinions and arguments of clinical researchers − an empirical study'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

    Cite this