Full Text Full Text (PDF) Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Email this article to a Colleague Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to My Articles & Searches Download to citation manager Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Articles by Fisher, C. B. Articles by Fried, A. L. Search for Related Content PubMed Citation Articles by Fisher, C. B. Articles by Fried, A. L. Informed Consent Mental Retardation

Capacity of Persons With Mental Retardation to Consent to Participate in Randomized Clinical Trials

OBJECTIVE: Adults with mental retardation have histories of cognitive and adaptive deficits posing unique ethical challenges for research consent assessment. This study examined the capacity of persons with mental retardation to consent to participate in randomized clinical trials. METHOD: A total of 150 adults (50 each with mild and moderate mental retardation and 50 comparison subjects without mental retardation) responded to a set of consent questions for a hypothetical randomized clinical trial testing a medication for aggressive disorders. Intelligence, adaptive behavior, medical treatment history, and consent history were evaluated. Univariate and multivariate methods were used to compare performance across and within groups. RESULTS: Comparison subjects scored significantly higher on measures of consent capacity than participants with mild mental retardation, who scored higher than those with moderate mental retardation. Most subjects with mental retardation were able to make a participation choice, and many understood research methods and appreciated the protagonist’s disorder and the consequences of participation. Almost half of those with mild mental retardation understood human subject protections. Performance was weakest on understanding the purpose of research and reasoning about whether to participate, suggesting vulnerability to the therapeutic misconception. Psychiatric and experiential factors did not predict consent capacity. CONCLUSIONS: While adults with mental retardation as a group showed consent deficits, many attained consent capacity scores comparable to those of comparison subjects. Investigators should consider individual differences and a consent format suited to deficits in language, memory, and attention before restricting consent opportunities for persons with mental retardation.

This article has been cited by other articles:

				D Andre-Barron, A Strydom, and A Hassiotis What to tell and how to tell: a qualitative study of information sharing in research for adults with intellectual disability J. Med. Ethics, June 1, 2008; 34(6): 501 - 506. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Get information about faster international access.

Privacy Policy

Copyright © 2006 American Psychiatric Association. All rights reserved.

Home | Search | Current Issue | Past Issues | Subscribe | All APPI Journals | Help | Contact Us