Skip to main content

Main Components of an Informed Consent

BayBiotech.NET
Dear All,

Happy 2010!

I plan to focus on the main components of an informed consent in this blog. Enjoy!

Informed consent (21 CFR 50.20, 21 CFR 50.25(a), and 21 CFR 50.25(b))
is a document prepared for the subjects who may be benefited from a clinical trial and provides the key facts about a clinical trial before deciding whether or not to participate.
In order to help someone decide whether or not to participate, the doctors and nurses involved in the trial explain the details of the study. If the participant's native language is not English, translation assistance can be provided for them.
Main component of an informed consent document are the key details about the study, such as its purpose, duration, required procedures, key contacts as well as risks and potential benefits associated with it. The participant then decides whether or not to sign the consent and participate in the study.
Informed consent is not a contract, and the participant may withdraw from the trial at any time.
Main components of an informed consent forms are:
 Information about the sponsor conducting the research.
 The main objective of the study.
 During the study how the research team will monitor the health and safety of the participants.
 As a participant the requirements for the follow-ups and the duration of the study.
 Possible benefits and risks associated.
 Other treatments those are available for the particular disease or condition.
 How the privacy of the medical records will be protected for the participating patients.
 Compensations if any for the participant’s time.
 The study staff also provides the participants a consent form, an agreement that he /she will sign if he /she decide to join the trial.

Mostly IRBs develop standard formats for informed consents as per FDA regulations and wherever changes are needed from the standard paragraphs or format; the investigators have to satisfy local IRB's concerns by explaining in the submission to the IRB why the changes are necessary.

To find out more about the regulations around Informed Consents follow the link:
http://www.fda.gov/RegulatoryInformation/Guidances/ucm126431.htm

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Good Machine Learning Practices

BayBiotech.NET A joint effort by FDA,  United Kingdom’s Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA) and Health Canada have developed guiding principles to help promote utilization of medical devices that are safe and effective and utilize artiificial intelligence and machine learning. To find out more details check out the link here!
Post a Comment
Read more

Group C (Treatment IND) Drugs

BayBiotech.NET Since 1976, National Cancer Institute (NCI) in agreement with FDA has established the Group C classification system to allow access to certain drugs for the cancer patients specifically falling under a category that adequate alternative therapy or if the available alternative therapy has significant toxic effects. Each Group C drug protocol specifies patient eligibility and drug use information. Group C drugs are provided only to properly trained physicians who have registered themselves with NCI using a special form to assure that their patient qualifies under guidelines - or protocols - for the drug. Physicians using drugs under Group C have no reporting requirements to the NCI other than the obligation to report adverse drug reactions. Group C drugs are provided free of charge, and the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services provides coverage for care associated with Group C therapy. Making Group C drugs available to the critically ill patients not only provi...
Post a Comment
Read more

Risk Based Clinical Monitoring

BayBiotech.NET FDA's recommendation of Risk Based Monitoring of Clinical Trials , as published in their Draft Guidance in August 2011. For the first time, FDA provided guidance on monitoring of clinical investigations in 1988 which was recently withdrawn, stated that the “most effective way” to monitor an investigation was to “maintain personal contact between the monitor and the investigator throughout the clinical investigation.” At the time the guidance was issued, sponsors had only limited ways to effect meaningful communication with investigators other than through on-site visits.   This guidance recommends an assessment by the sponsor for the need of 100% on-site monitoring. Such an assessment may be based on the complexity of the study protocol and not be generally applicable to all trial types. It explains the importance of remote monitoring facilitated by the use of electronic data capture system (EDC) and also emphasizes the need of the identifying crit...
1 comment
Read more