Psychiatric research ethics: an overview of evolving guidelines and current ethical dilemmas in the study of mental illness

Feasibility of six-month outpatient cognitive remediation in schizophrenia: Experience from the randomized controlled integrated social cognition and social skills therapy study

Patients with schizophrenia often have cognitive impairments that contribute to diminished psychosocial functioning. Cognitive remediation therapy (CRT) has proven efficacy and is recommended by evidence-based treatment guidelines. Important moderators of efficacy include integration of CRT into a psychiatric rehabilitation concept and patient attendance at a sufficient number of therapy sessions. These conditions can probably best be met in an outpatient setting; however, outpatient treatment is prone to higher rates of treatment discontinuation and outpatient settings are not as well protected as inpatient ones and less closely supervised.The present study investigated the feasibility of outpatient CRT in schizophrenia over a six-month period. Adherence to scheduled sessions and safety parameters were assessed in 177 patients with schizophrenia randomly assigned to one of two matched CRT programs.Results showed that 58.8 % of participants completed the CRT (>80 % of scheduled sessions) and 72.9 % completed at least half the sessions. Predictor analysis revealed a high verbal intelligence quotient as favorable for good adherence, but this factor had only low general predictive power. During the six-month treatment phase, serious adverse events occurred in 15.8 % (28/177) of the patients, which is a comparable rate to that reported in the literature.Our findings support the feasibility of six-month outpatient CRT in schizophrenia in terms of adherence to scheduled sessions and safety.

Trial registration number

NCT02678858, DRKS00010033.

Assisted dying requests from people in detention: Psychiatric, ethical, and legal considerations-A literature review

The principle of equivalence of care states that prisoners must have access to the same standard of health care as the general population. If, as recent court decisions suggest, assisted dying is not limited to people with a terminal physical illness or irremediable suffering, it might also be requested by people with severe mental illness in detention. Some of the countries with legal regulations on assisted dying also have recommendations on how to handle requests from prisoners. However, detention itself can lead to psychological distress and suicidality, so we must consider whether and how people in such settings can make autonomous decisions. Ethical conflicts arise with regard to an individual's free will, right to life, and physical and personal integrity and to the right of a state to inflict punishment. Furthermore, people in prison often receive insufficient mental health care. In this review, we compare different practices for dealing with requests for assisted dying from people in prison and forensic psychiatric facilities and discuss the current ethical and psychiatric issues concerning assisted dying in such settings.

Perspectives on Recruitment and Representativeness in Forensic Psychiatric Research

Participant representativeness and statistical power are crucial elements of robust research with human participants, both of which relate to the successful recruitment of research participants. Nevertheless, such core features may often not be fully reported or duly considered in psychiatric research. Building on our experiences of collecting data in the context of forensic mental health services, we discuss issues regarding participant recruitment and representativeness in our field with its particular characteristics. A quick sampling and brief overview of the literature in four specialized forensic mental health journals is presented, demonstrating that published manuscripts rarely describe the data in sufficient detail for the reader to assess sample representativeness and statistical power. This lack of transparency leads not only to difficulties in interpreting the research; it also entails risks relating to the already meager evidence base of forensic mental health services being relevant only to a subset of patients. Accordingly, we provide suggestions for increased transparency in reporting and improved recruitment of research participants. We also discuss the balance of ethical considerations pertinent to the pursuit of increased participation rates in forensic mental health research.

Do human subject safeguards matter to potential participants in psychiatric genetic research?

Despite longstanding concerns about the adequacy of human research protections in mental illness investigations, minimal work has focused on the perspectives of key stakeholders regarding these safeguards. This investigation examined the perspectives of potential research participants regarding safeguards for psychiatric genetic research. Individuals with mental illness (n = 71), first-degree family members of individuals with mental illness (n = 54), and individuals with no personal or close family history of mental illness (n = 57) provided responses to items regarding perceptions of: 1) protectiveness of a range of research safeguards in genetic research on mental illness; 2) influence of these safeguards on research participation decision-making; and 3) importance of these safeguards depending on the nature of the research (i.e., genetic vs. non-genetic mental illness research; and genetic research on mental illness vs. physical illness). Potential research participants perceived existing safeguard procedures as generally protective. The three groups did not differ in their ratings of protectiveness, with the exception of the safeguard domain of "Informed Consent or Alternative Decision-Making Procedures," which was viewed as more protective by family members of people with mental illness than by individuals with mental illness or comparison participants. Safeguard procedures were perceived as strongly influential with respect to willingness to enroll in psychiatric genetic research. These findings suggest that the presence of safeguards positively influences enrollment decision-making by research volunteers and indicate that potential psychiatric genetic research participants find safeguards to be protective, underscoring the responsibility to implement safeguard practices conscientiously.

Guidelines for the standardized collection of blood-based biomarkers in psychiatry: Steps for laboratory validity - a consensus of the Biomarkers Task Force from the WFSBP

Recently, there has been a major shift in the field of psychiatry towards the exploration of complex relationships between blood-based biomarkers and the pathophysiology of psychiatric and neuropsychiatric disorders. However, issues with study reproducibility, validity and reliability have hindered progress towards the identification of clinically relevant biomarkers for psychiatry. The achievement of laboratory validity is a crucial first step for the posterior development of clinical validity. There is evidence that the variability observed in blood-based research studies may be minimised with the implementation of standardised pre-analytical methods and uniform clinical protocols (i.e., pre-venipuncture). It has been documented that errors made in the pre-analytical phase account for 46-68.2% of laboratory testing errors. Thus, standardising clinical assessment, ethical procedures and pre-analytical phase of clinical research is essential for the reproducibility, validity and reliability of blood marker assessment, and reducing the risk of invalid test results. Various other areas of research have already moved towards guidelines for the standardised collection of blood-based biomarkers. Here we aim to provide a set of guidelines that we believe would improve biomarker research: (1) pre-venipuncture information and documentation, (2) ethics of participant consent and (3) pre-analytical methods. Ultimately, we hope this will assist study planning and will improve data comparison across studies allowing for the discovery of biomarkers in psychiatry with both laboratorial and clinical validity.

Is It Ethical to Use Prognostic Estimates from Machine Learning to Treat Psychosis?

Machine learning is a method for predicting clinically relevant variables, such as opportunities for early intervention, potential treatment response, prognosis, and health outcomes. This commentary examines the following ethical questions about machine learning in a case of a patient with new onset psychosis: (1) When is clinical innovation ethically acceptable? (2) How should clinicians communicate with patients about the ethical issues raised by a machine learning predictive model?

Rethinking vulnerable groups in clinical research

Vulnerable groups are often excluded from clinical research on the basis of scientific, ethical and practical reasons. Although intended to protect vulnerable people and maintain study integrity, exclusion of vulnerable groups from research through use of standard exclusion criteria may not always be necessary and may result in findings that are not generalisable. Achieving a balance between the competing needs to protect vulnerable people and to make progress in our understanding of disorders and their management through research requires a reconsideration of exclusion criteria and consent processes to ensure vulnerable people are appropriately represented in clinical research. Reasons for development of broad exclusion criteria include both concrete barriers and intangible discouraging factors. This paper examines this situation and its consequences, perceived and real barriers to inclusion of vulnerable people in research, and suggests methods for overcoming these barriers and applying thoughtful exclusion criteria.

Ethics in Psychiatric Research: Issues and Recommendations

Psychiatric research has increased remarkably over recent decades to help in understanding the current trends and better therapeutic options for illness. On the other hand, there is also a trend toward higher rates of retraction of published papers in the recent years. Ethics is required to maintain and increase the overall quality and morality of research. Psychiatric research faces several unique ethical challenges. Ethical guidelines are very important tool of research which safeguards participants; however, there is a dearth of such guidelines in India. The present paper aims to review available ethical issues and guidelines pertaining to psychiatric research. A search was conducted on Pubmed using search terms (e.g., "ethics," "psychiatry," "research"). Relevant studies were selected for the review after manual screening of title/abstract. Additional sources were referred to using cross references and Google Scholar. Psychiatric research has several important ethical issues which are different from other medical disciplines. These issues are related to informed consent, confidentiality, conflict of interest, therapeutic misconception, placebo related, vulnerability, exploitation, operational challenges, among others. The current paper has made several recommendations to deal with ethical challenges commonly faced in psychiatric research. The ethical guidelines are utmost needed for Indian psychiatric research. Specific guidelines are lacking pertaining to psychiatric research. The issues and recommendations merit a further discussion and consideration.

Healthy individuals' perspectives on clinical research protocols and influences on enrollment decisions

BACKGROUND

Understanding the perspectives of healthy individuals is important ethically and for the advancement of science. We assessed perceptions of risk associated with research procedures, comparing views of healthy individuals with and without experience in clinical research, and the respondents' reported willingness to volunteer.

METHODS

Semistructured interviews and written surveys were conducted. Study participants were healthy individuals, half of whom were currently enrolled in clinical research and half of whom had no prior experience in clinical research. Participants were queried regarding seven "minimal risk" or "greater than minimal risk" protocol vignettes with procedures of three types: routine diagnostic tests, more burdensome (i.e., more effort or potential harm) diagnostic tests, and pharmacologic interventions. Views of influences on enrollment decisions were also assessed.

RESULTS

Most healthy individuals indicated that protocols with more burdensome or pharmacologic interventions were very risky (59%, 58%), as opposed to routine diagnostic test procedures (32%). Respondents' willingness to enroll in protocols varied by type of protocol (p value < .001) and was inversely correlated with risk assessments (regression coefficients from GEE = -0.4; -0.5; -0.7). The odds of healthy individuals with research experience expressing strong willingness to enroll in the depicted protocols were twice the odds of healthy individuals without research experience expressing the same level of willingness (OR = 2.0 95% CI: [1.1, 3.9]). Respondents did not assign risk categories as institutional review boards (IRBs) would, as indicated by low agreement (26%) between respondent and expert opinion on minimal risk protocols.

CONCLUSIONS

Perceptions of procedure risk appear to influence healthy individuals' willingness to enroll in protocols. Participants with experience in clinical research were far more likely to express willingness to enroll, a finding with important scientific and ethical implications. The lack of alignment between healthy individuals' views of protocol risk and IRB categorization warrants further study.

Questionable Requirement for Consent in Observational Research in Psychiatry

Informed consent represents a cornerstone of the endeavours to make health care research ethically acceptable. Based on experience of qualitative research on power dynamics in nursing care in acute psychiatry, we show that the requirement for informed consent may be practised in formalistic ways that legitimize the researcher's activities without taking the patient's changing perception of the situation sufficiently into account. The presentation of three patient case studies illustrates a diversity of issues that the researcher must consider in each situation. We argue for the necessity of researchers to base their judgement on a complex set of competencies. Consciousness of research ethics must be combined with knowledge of the challenges involved in research methodology in qualitative research and familiarity with the therapeutic arena in which the research is being conducted. The article shows that the alternative solution is not simple but must emphasize the researcher's ability to doubt and be based on an awareness of the researcher's fallibility.

Longitudinal informed consent competency in stable community patients with schizophrenia: A one-week training and one-year follow-up study

OBJECTIVE

This study explores the efficacy of a one-week informed consent information training process for improving competence to provide consent in stable community patients with schizophrenia over a one-year follow-up period.

METHOD

A one-week training session designed to enhance competence to provide informed consent for research was conducted. The training was guided by a research protocol that provided detailed explanations of each major conceptual unit. Participants were followed for one year, and comprised 50 stable community outpatients with schizophrenia who were randomly assigned to either an intervention group (IG, n=33) or a control group (CG, n=17) that did not receive any training. The Chinese Mandarin MacArthur Competence Assessment Tool-Clinical Research (MacCAT-CR) was used to assess competence for informed consent pre-training (baseline), post-training (one week later), and at the end of one year.

RESULTS

A repeated measures analysis comparing the IG and CG at pre-training, post-training and the one-year follow-up revealed significant improvements in the Understanding and Appreciation subscale following the one-week training. However, by the end of one year, scores returned to baseline levels, with the exception of the Appreciation subscale, which was below baseline. There were significant main effects across time on the Appreciation and Reasoning subscales, indicating considerable changes over time. The CG showed no significant changes from pre-training to one week later or at one-year follow-up for all subscales.

CONCLUSIONS

The capacities of understanding and appreciation can be improved in stable community patients with schizophrenia after one week of training; however, this training effect is not sustained one year later. The results suggest that more intensive or periodic trainings may be needed to maintain long-term competence levels in patients with schizophrenia, particularly with regard to their capacity to appreciate the nature and consequences of study participation.

Demonstrating Patterns in the Views Of Stakeholders Regarding Ethically-Salient Issues in Clinical Research: A Novel Use of Graphical Models in Empirical Ethics Inquiry

BACKGROUND

Empirical ethics inquiry works from the notion that stakeholder perspectives are necessary for gauging the ethical acceptability of human studies and assuring that research aligns with societal expectations. Although common, studies involving different populations often entail comparisons of trends that problematize the interpretation of results. Using graphical model selection - a technique aimed at transcending limitations of conventional methods - this report presents data on the ethics of clinical research with two objectives: (1) to display the patterns of views held by ill and healthy individuals in clinical research as a test of the study's original hypothesis and (2) to introduce graphical model selection as a key analytic tool for ethics research.

METHODS

In this IRB-approved, NIH-funded project, data were collected from 60 mentally ill and 43 physically ill clinical research protocol volunteers, 47 healthy protocol-consented participants, and 29 healthy individuals without research protocol experience. Respondents were queried on the ethical acceptability of research involving people with mental and physical illness (i.e., cancer, HIV, depression, schizophrenia, and post-traumatic stress disorder) and non-illness related sources of vulnerability (e.g., age, class, gender, ethnicity). Using a statistical algorithm, we selected graphical models to display interrelationships among responses to questions.

RESULTS

Both mentally and physically ill protocol volunteers revealed a high degree of connectivity among ethically-salient perspectives. Healthy participants, irrespective of research protocol experience, revealed patterns of views that were not highly connected.

CONCLUSION

Between ill and healthy protocol participants, the pattern of views is vastly different. Experience with illness was tied to dense connectivity, whereas healthy individuals expressed views with sparse connections. In offering a nuanced perspective on the interrelation of ethically relevant responses, graphical model selection has the potential to bring new insights to the field of ethics.

Giving voice to study volunteers: comparing views of mentally ill, physically ill, and healthy protocol participants on ethical aspects of clinical research

MOTIVATION

Ethical controversy surrounds clinical research involving seriously ill participants. While many stakeholders have opinions, the extent to which protocol volunteers themselves see human research as ethically acceptable has not been documented. To address this gap of knowledge, authors sought to assess views of healthy and ill clinical research volunteers regarding the ethical acceptability of human studies involving individuals who are ill or are potentially vulnerable.

METHODS

Surveys and semi-structured interviews were used to query clinical research protocol participants and a comparison group of healthy individuals. A total of 179 respondents participated in this study: 150 in protocols (60 mentally ill, 43 physically ill, and 47 healthy clinical research protocol participants) and 29 healthy individuals not enrolled in protocols. Main outcome measures included responses regarding ethical acceptability of clinical research when it presents significant burdens and risks, involves people with serious mental and physical illness, or enrolls people with other potential vulnerabilities in the research situation.

RESULTS

Respondents expressed decreasing levels of acceptance of participation in research that posed burdens of increasing severity. Participation in protocols with possibly life-threatening consequences was perceived as least acceptable (mean = 1.82, sd = 1.29). Research on serious illnesses, including HIV, cancer, schizophrenia, depression, and post-traumatic stress disorder, was seen as ethically acceptable across respondent groups (range of means = [4.0, 4.7]). Mentally ill volunteers expressed levels of ethical acceptability for physical illness research and mental illness research as acceptable and similar, while physically ill volunteers expressed greater ethical acceptability for physical illness research than for mental illness research. Mentally ill, physically ill, and healthy participants expressed neutral to favorable perspectives regarding the ethical acceptability of clinical research participation by potentially vulnerable subpopulations (difference in acceptability perceived by mentally ill - healthy = -0.04, CI [-0.46, 0.39]; physically ill - healthy = -0.13, CI [-0.62, -.36]).

CONCLUSIONS

Clinical research volunteers and healthy clinical research-"naïve" individuals view studies involving ill people as ethically acceptable, and their responses reflect concern regarding research that poses considerable burdens and risks and research involving vulnerable subpopulations. Physically ill research volunteers may be more willing to see burdensome and risky research as acceptable. Mentally ill research volunteers and healthy individuals expressed similar perspectives in this study, helping to dispel a misconception that those with mental illness should be presumed to hold disparate views.

Do investigators understand ethically-important perspectives of clinical research participants?: a 'piggy-back' study of attunement and alignment in serious illness research

OBJECTIVE

The authors sought to compare investigators' predictions of clinical research participants' attitudes regarding ethically-important considerations in serious illness research with attitudes expressed by participants ("attunement"), to compare the personal attitudes of investigators and clinical research participants ("alignment"), and to explore the association between views expressed and covariates.

METHOD

The authors queried clinical research participants with either physical or mental illness (n=100) and faculty investigators conducting the clinical research protocols in which these participants were enrolled (n=77). Outcomes included attitudes regarding importance of medical research, attributes of seriously ill people in the research situation, and influences on enrollment decisions by seriously ill people. Generalized estimating equations and linear regression models were used.

RESULTS

Investigators underestimated the importance of research about physical illness, mental illness, and healthy people to participants (βPI=0.59, 95% CI [0.36, 0.83]; βMI=0.60, 95% CI [0.27, 0.92]; βH=0.93, 95% CI [0.57, 1.29]). Investigators incorrectly predicted that participants would assess seriously ill people as more vulnerable in the research situation than participants did (β=-0.68, 95% CI [-1.11, -0.25]). Investigators and participants were aligned on the importance of illness research. Participants expressed greater agreement than investigators regarding the influences of ill individuals indicative of will and cognition in their enrollment decisions (β=0.69, 95% CI [0.25, 1.13]).

CONCLUSIONS

Investigators are attuned to and aligned with research participants in many, but not all, respects. Investigators may bring a protective bias in their predictions of the vulnerabilities of ill volunteers.

Addressing risks to advance mental health research

IMPORTANCE

Risk communication and management are essential to the ethical conduct of research, yet addressing risks may be time consuming for investigators and institutional review boards may reject study designs that seem too risky. This can discourage needed research, particularly in higher-risk protocols or those enrolling potentially vulnerable individuals, such as those with some level of suicidality. Improved mechanisms for addressing research risks may facilitate much needed psychiatric research.

OBJECTIVE

To provide mental health researchers with practical approaches to (1) identify and define various intrinsic research risks, (2) communicate these risks to others (eg, potential participants, regulatory bodies, and society), (3) manage these risks during the course of a study, and (4) justify the risks.

EVIDENCE REVIEW

As part of a National Institute of Mental Health-funded scientific meeting series, a public conference and a closed-session expert panel meeting were held on managing and disclosing risks in mental health clinical trials. The expert panel reviewed the literature with a focus on empirical studies and developed recommendations for best practices and further research on managing and disclosing risks in mental health clinical trials. No institutional review board-review was required because there were no human subjects.

FINDINGS

Challenges, current data, practical strategies, and topics for future research are addressed for each of 4 key areas pertaining to management and disclosure of risks in clinical trials: identifying and defining risks, communicating risks, managing risks during studies, and justifying research risks.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

Empirical data on risk communication, managing risks, and the benefits of research can support the ethical conduct of mental health research and may help investigators better conceptualize and confront risks and to gain institutional review board-approval.

Paradigm shifts in disability and health: toward more ethical public health research

Disability is often considered a health outcome disproportionately experienced by minority groups. It is also possible to view people with disabilities as a minority group that itself experiences health disparities. Calls to reduce these disparities necessitate the inclusion of people with developmental disabilities in research, although resulting ethical issues can thwart scientific progress. Using disability rights principles can help address ethical challenges and promote safe, respectful public health research. Examples include applying human rights frameworks, providing accommodations, attending to power, countering legacies of deficits-based models of disability, and transforming access to science more broadly. Collectively, these strategies can encourage broader engagement in safe, respectful, inclusive public health research aimed at promoting the health and well-being of people with developmental disabilities.

Ethical challenges in mental health research among internally displaced people: ethical theory and research implementation

Millions of people undergo displacement in the world. Internally displaced people (IDP) are especially vulnerable as they are not protected by special legislation in contrast to other migrants. Research conducted among IDPs must be correspondingly sensitive in dealing with ethical issues that may arise. Muslim IDPs in Puttalam district in the North-Western province of Sri Lanka were initially displaced from Northern Sri Lanka due to the conflict in 1991. In the backdrop of a study exploring the prevalence of common mental disorders among the IDPs, researchers encountered various ethical challenges. These included inter-related issues of autonomy, non-maleficence, beneficence, confidentiality and informed consent, and how these were tailored in a culture-specific way to a population that has increased vulnerability. This paper analyses how these ethical issues were perceived, detected and managed by the researchers, and the role of ethics review committees in mental health research concerning IDPs. The relevance of guidelines and methodologies in the context of an atypical study population and the benefit versus risk potential of research for IDPs are also discussed. The limitations that were encountered while dealing with ethical challenges during the study are discussed. The concept of post-research ethical conduct audit is suggested to be considered as a potential step to minimize the exploitation of vulnerable populations such as IDPs in mental health research.

Association between cigarette smoking and suicide in psychiatric inpatients

Introduction

Cigarette smoking is the single largest preventable cause of death and disability in the industrialized world and it causes at least 85% of lung cancers, chronic bronchitis and emphysema. In addition smokers are at a higher risk from psychiatric co-morbid illness such as depression and completed suicide.

Methods

We conducted a cross-sectional survey in which we targeted all patients with serious mental illness (SMI) who were admitted in Razi mental health Hospital in Tehran, Iran. We recruited 984 participants, who were receiving services from Razi mental health Hospital and hospitalized for at least two days between 21 July to 21 September, 2010. Nine hundred and fifty patients out of this figure were able to participate in our study.

Results

The final study sample (n = 950) consisted of 73.2% males and 26.8% females. The mean age was 45.31 (SD=13.7). A majority of participants (70%) was smoker. A history of never smoking was present for 25.2% of the study sample; while 4.8% qualified as former smokers and 70.0% as occasional or current smokers. Two hundred and nineteen participants had attempted suicide amongst them 102 (46.6%) once, 37 (16.9%) twice, and 80 (36.5%) attempted more than two times in their life time. In regression model, gender, age, and cigarette consumption were associated with previous suicide attempts and entered the model in this order as significant predictors.

Conclusion

There is an association of cigarette smoking and suicide attempt in psychiatric inpatients. Current smoking, a simple clinical assessment, should trigger greater attention by clinicians to potential suicidality and become part of a comprehensive assessment of suicide risk.

A neuroimaging proof of principle study of Down's syndrome and dementia: ethical and methodological challenges in intrusive research

BACKGROUND

Research into specific illnesses and the development of new treatments may only become possible as new technologies become available. When used for research, such technologies may best be described as 'intrusive', in that they require a considerable willingness and commitment on the part of the participants. This has increasingly been the case for brain disorders and illnesses where novel neuroimaging techniques, often combined with clinical and psychological assessments, have the potential to result in new understanding. People with intellectual disabilities (ID) have a history of under-representation as participants in research using such technologies and are therefore at risk of not receiving equal access to state-of-the-art treatments. We propose that 'intrusive' biomedical research is both possible and ethical in ID, and explore some of the methodological challenges by reference to a recent proof of principle study that used a relatively new ligand-based brain scanning technique in a group of volunteers with Down's syndrome.

METHODS

Five overlapping stages of the study methodology were identified and evaluated for their acceptability to volunteers with mild to moderate ID through discussion, reflection, and analysis of structured feedback in the context of key policy documents, ethical guidelines and relevant legislation.

RESULTS

Identification of key ethical and methodological challenges from reflective practice and participant feedback facilitated the emergence of strategies that permitted continual refinement of the study design. Important areas considered included (1) being clear about the purpose and scientific justification for the study; (2) reconciling the potential risks and benefits with relevant ethical guidelines and legislation; (3) identifying and implementing effective recruitment strategies; (4) optimising and assessing capacity to consent; and (5) making the 'intrusive' procedures as acceptable as possible to people with ID.

CONCLUSION

We were able to demonstrate that a proof of principle study incorporating a novel brain scanning technique in a group of volunteers with ID was feasible, safe and well tolerated, despite the vulnerabilities of the study cohort and the intrusive nature of the research. We consider the study within an ethical and historical discourse about the principles that define current 'best practice' in ID research and propose a number of key recommendations for making intrusive research acceptable in people with ID.

Restoring balance: a consensus statement on the protection of vulnerable research participants

A diverse panel convened in June 2011 to explore a dilemma in human research: some traits may make individuals or communities particularly vulnerable to a variety of harms in research; however, well-intended efforts to protect these vulnerable individuals and communities from harm may actually generate a series of new harms. We have presented a consensus statement forged by the panel through discussion during a 2-day meeting and the article-writing process. We have identified practical problems that sometimes arise in connection with providing additional safeguards for groups labeled as vulnerable and offered recommendations on how we might better balance concerns for protection with concerns for justice and participant autonomy.

Competing commitments in psychiatric research: an examination of psychiatric researchers' perspectives

Clinician-researchers have responsibilities both to seek the best interests of the people they treat and to advance scientific knowledge. The purpose of this study was to examine researchers' beliefs and behaviors regarding areas of tension between their clinical and scientific roles. We conducted and analyzed 19 in-depth interviews with psychiatric clinical researchers to explore these issues. Responses usually indicated that researchers recognize limits on their abilities to be helpful to patients, since they cannot know in advance whether a specific research intervention will help and whether participation is in the patient's best interest. Hence, most researchers did not make special efforts to recruit patients doing poorly in standard care, although they occasionally tolerated minor deviations from recruitment and treatment protocols when they might be in participants' interests. Often respondents asked the IRB to approve these deviations or change the protocol for all subjects, though it was unclear how often they may have acted without this approval. Despite researchers' high regard for following the research protocol, clinical judgment remained the ultimate guide if patients were not doing well and needed alternative care. Hence, respondents expressed a strong commitment both to protecting patients' interests and to advancing science. In cases of direct conflict between the two, many of the researchers tended to promote patients' best interests even at some cost to scientific research.

Adverse effects of cognitive behavioral therapy and cognitive remediation in schizophrenia: results of the treatment of negative symptoms study

This study examined the frequency and extent of detrimental effects of cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) for psychosis. In a randomized clinical trial, we investigated the efficacy of CBT for the reduction of negative symptoms as compared with cognitive remediation (CR) in schizophrenia patients (n = 198). Safety was addressed through assessment of severe adverse events (SAEs), which were defined as suicides, suicide attempts, suicidal crises, and severe symptom exacerbations over a period of 12 months after inclusion in the study. Monthly assessments with Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale and Scale for the Assessment of Negative Symptoms allowed for the analysis of symptom increases during the treatment. There were no suicides in the trial. SAEs were observed in 10 CBT and 5 CR patients. Increases in negative symptoms occurred in 64 CBT and 58 CR patients. These differences were not significant. The maximum increase in negative symptoms under treatment, as compared with the baseline, was equal to an effect size of -0.66 in CBT patients and -0.77 in CR patients. Thus, the SAE rate was comparable between both interventions and was relatively low, given the severity of the psychotic disorder. Therapists should be aware of a subgroup of patients who show symptom increases with large effect sizes and might require more intensive care.

Participants' Perceptions of Deep Brain Stimulation Research for Treatment-Resistant Depression: Risks, Benefits, and Therapeutic Misconception

BACKGROUND

Deep brain stimulation (DBS) for treatment-resistant depression (TRD) is the focus of great interest and numerous studies. Given the state of this research, the risks of DBS, the uncertainty of direct benefits, and the potential for therapeutic misconception (TM), examination of research participants' perspectives is critical to addressing concerns about the adequacy of consent among people with TRD.

METHODS

Among 31 participants considering DBS studies at two sites, self-report questionnaires were used to examine three dimensions of TM (eight true/false items). Additional Likert-scale items assessed perceptions of risks, potential benefits, and altruistic motivations.

RESULTS

Participants correctly identified the surgery itself as the riskiest study procedure, although only four participants rated the surgery as "high risk." Most participants rated the entire DBS study as "moderate" or lower risk. Participants rated the likelihood of others benefiting in the future more strongly than they did the likelihood of personal benefit. Participants held positive attitudes toward research, and were moderately altruistic. Nearly two-thirds of the 31 participants (64.5%) answered at least one of the true/false TM items incorrectly.

CONCLUSIONS

Individuals considering DBS studies for TRD demonstrated reasonable perceptions of risks and benefits, distinguished among procedural risks, and expressed hopes for personal benefit as well as altruism. Findings related to TM were mixed: Participants understood the experimental stage of DBS for depression and endorsed the possibility of no personal benefit, yet there was some evidence for TM. Although these findings are reassuring, investigators must nevertheless remain vigilant about identifying and addressing potential misconceptions.

Ethical considerations in clinical training, care and research in psychopharmacology

Psychopharmacology is a powerful tool in psychiatry; however, it is one that demands responsibility in order to deal with the ethical complexities that accompany advances in the field. It is important that questions are asked and that ethical mindfulness and sensitivity are developed along with clinical skills. In order to cultivate and deepen ethical awareness and subsequently solve issues in optimal fashion, investment should be made in the development of an ethical decision-making process as well as in education in the ethics of psychopharmacology to trainees in the field at all stages of their educational development. A clear approach to identifying ethical problems, engaging various ethical concepts in considering solutions and then applying these principles in problem resolution is demanded. An openness in identifying and exploring issues has become crucial to the future development and maturation of psychopharmacologists, both research and clinical. Consideration must be given to the social implications of psychopharmacological practice, with the best interests of patients always paramount. From both a research and clinical perspective, psychopharmacology has to be practised with fairness, sensitivity and ethical relevance to all. While ethical issues related to psychopharmacological practice are varied and plentiful, this review focuses on advances in technology and biological sciences, personal integrity, special populations, and education and training.

Mature care and nursing in psychiatry: notions regarding reciprocity in asymmetric professional relationships

The idea behind this article is to discuss the importance and to develop the concept of reciprocity in asymmetric professional relationships. As an empirical starting point for an examination of the possible forms of reciprocity between patients and nurses in psychiatry, we chose two qualitative in-depth interviews with two different patients. The manners in which these two patients relate to medical personnel--one is dependent, the other is independent--show that this presents challenges to nurses. The theoretical context is provided by the notion of mature care as it has been developed by feminist-oriented ethics of care, in contrast to the notion of altruistic care. In relation to the concept of mature care, we discuss how nursing can be perceived in demanding relationships with patients in psychiatry. Reciprocity implies that, in principle, the interests of the nurses also matter in a nurse-patient relationship. We show that reciprocity--in practice--is complicated and challenging in a number of different ways. Mature care--with its systematic inclusion of relationships and reciprocity--provides an alternative understanding of what takes place between patients and nurses compared with an altruistic notion of care. As such, mature care can be regarded as an useful paradigm for nurse-patient relationships in psychiatry.

Ethics in Psychiatric Research: A Review of 25 Years of NIH-funded Empirical Research Projects

BACKGROUND: This paper reviews the past 25 years of empirical research funded by the National Institutes of Health (NIH) on matters of ethics in psychiatric research. METHODS: Using the NIH RePORTER and Medline databases, we identified 43 grants and 77 publications that involved the empirical study of a matter of ethics in research involving mental health service users. RESULTS: These articles provide original and useful information on important topics, most especially the capacity to consent and the voluntariness of consent. For example, participants who share a diagnosis vary widely in levels of cognitive impairment that correlate with decisional capacity, and capacity to consent can be enhanced easily using iterative consent processes. Few articles address matters of justice or benefits in research, particularly from the perspectives of participants. No articles address matters of privacy, confidentiality, or researcher professionalism. CONCLUSIONS: Despite the usefulness of data from the studies conducted to date, current research on research ethics in psychiatry does not adequately address the concerns of service users as expressed in recent publications.

Ethical Issues in Deep Brain Stimulation Research for Treatment-Resistant Depression: Focus on Risk and Consent

Deep brain stimulation (DBS) is currently in pivotal trials as an intervention for treatment-resistant depression (TRD). Although offering hope for TRD, DBS also provokes ethical concerns-particularly about decision-making capacity of people with depression-among bioethicists, investigators, institutional review boards, and the public. Here, we examine this critical issue of informed consent for DBS research using available evidence regarding decision-making capacity and depression. Further, we explore the implications of the nature of TRD as well as that of the intervention (invasive brain surgery) for informed consent. Based on these analyses, we argue that additional safeguards specific to DBS research for TRD, beyond those that might be used in any higher risk study, are not supported by available empirical evidence. We nevertheless underscore the limited data on such invasive procedures in severely ill psychiatric patients and advocate a research agenda for the systematic study of ethical issues raised by these research endeavors.

Gender-specific profiles of tobacco use among non-institutionalized people with serious mental illness

BACKGROUND

In many countries, smoking remains the leading preventable cause of death. In North America, reductions in population smoking levels are stabilising and, in recent years, those involved in tobacco control programming have turned their attention to particular segments of society that are at greatest risk for tobacco use. One such group is people with mental illness. A picture of tobacco use patterns among those with mental illness is beginning to emerge; however, there are several unanswered questions. In particular, most studies have been limited to particular in-patient groups. In addition, while it is recognised that men and women differ in relation to their reasons for smoking, levels of addiction to nicotine, and difficulties with cessation, these sex and gender differences have not been fully explored in psychiatric populations.

METHODS

Community residents with serious mental illness were surveyed to describe their patterns of tobacco use and to develop a gender-specific profile of their smoking status and its predictors.

RESULTS

Of 729 respondents, almost one half (46.8%) were current tobacco users with high nicotine dependence levels. They spent a majority of their income on tobacco, and reported using smoking to cope with their psychiatric symptoms. Current smokers, compared with non-smokers, were more likely to be: diagnosed with a schizophrenia spectrum disorder (rather than a mood disorder); male; relatively young; not a member of a racialised group (e.g., Aboriginal, Asian, South Asian, Black); poorly educated; separated or divorced; housed in a residential facility, shelter, or on the street; receiving social assistance; and reporting co-morbid substance use. There is evidence of a gender interaction with these factors; in the gender-specific multivariate logistic regression models, schizophrenia spectrum disorder versus mood disorder was not predictive of women's smoking, nor was education, marital status or cocaine use. Women, and not men, however, were more likely to be smokers if they were young and living in a residential facility.

CONCLUSION

For men only, the presence of schizophrenia spectrum disorder is a risk factor for tobacco use. Other factors, of a social nature, contribute to the risk of smoking for both men and women with serious mental illness. The findings suggest that important social determinants of smoking are "gendered" in this population, thus tobacco control and smoking cessation programming should be gender sensitive.

Worth the risk? Relationship of incentives to risk and benefit perceptions and willingness to participate in schizophrenia research

OBJECTIVE

Providing incentives for research participation is widely practiced but minimally studied. In schizophrenia research, questions about capacity to consent and potential vulnerability may raise concerns when offering incentives for participation. Despite empirical attention focused on consent and decision-making capacity in schizophrenia, the issue of incentives has been essentially ignored. We examined willingness to participate in research, in relation to perceived risks and benefits, among people with schizophrenia and schizoaffective disorder.

METHOD

Forty-six people with schizophrenia or schizoaffective disorder rated perceived risks and benefits of 5 hypothetical research vignettes. They also indicated whether they would be willing to participate at each of 5 incentive levels (including no compensation). Cognition was assessed with Mattis Dementia Rating Scale.

RESULTS

Ratings of risk and potential personal benefit were inversely correlated. For all scenarios, significant correlations were found between perceived risk and willingness to participate for greater compensation. Conversely, lower perceived likelihood of benefit was associated with a higher compensation threshold for participation in each scenario. Even at the highest proffered payment level for each scenario, however, a substantial proportion of respondents were not willing to participate. Risk assessment and willingness to participate (at all levels of compensation) were not associated with demographic variables or cognitive status.

CONCLUSIONS

Determining whether incentives impede voluntarism remains an important task for empirical ethics research. Assessing potential research participants' understanding and perceptions of risks, benefits, and alternatives to participation will help ensure that informed consent fulfills its mission--embodying the ethical principle of respect for persons.

Creating Trust in an Acute Psychiatric Ward

The ideal of trust pervades nursing. This article uses empirical material from acute psychiatry that reveals that it is distrust rather than trust that is prevalent in this field. Our data analyses show how distrust is expressed in the therapeutic environment and in the relationship between nurse and patient. We point out how trust can nonetheless be created in an environment that is characterized by distrust. Both trust and distrust are exposed as `fragile' phenomena that can easily `tip over' towards their opposites. Trust is not something that nurses possess or are given; it is rather something that they earn and have to work hard to achieve. Regarding themselves as potential causes of distrust and active wielders of power can contribute to nurses developing a more realistic view of their practice. Assuming a realistic middle-way perspective can help to manoeuvre between the extremities of excellence and resignation, which in turn can lead to processes that create trust between psychotic patients and nurses.

A review of ethics in psychiatric research

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

To summarize important recent contributions to the literature on the subject of ethics in psychiatric research.

RECENT FINDINGS

Current literature reflects an expansion in the range of psychiatric research on ethics topics. Articles continue to appear on core ethics subjects such as informed consent, but many recent contributions focus on diverse issues such as third-party privacy, the ethics of Internet-based research, revisiting the wisdom of imposing medical ethics requirements on observational research, and psychiatric research ethics as applied to special populations such as children or older persons.

SUMMARY

Psychiatric research is critical for the elucidation, prevention, and treatment of mental diseases. Increased attention and novel approaches taken to obtain informed consent, correcting therapeutic misconception, and guarding privacy will advance the research enterprise and continue to ensure that the subjective experiences of participants in psychiatric research remain positive.

Many faces of the dual-role dilemma in psychiatric ethics

OBJECTIVE

To identify the various potential manifestations of the dual-role dilemma in the psychiatric ethics literature.

METHOD

The terms 'dual role', 'dual agency', 'overlapping roles', and 'double agency' were searched on the electronic databases PubMed, Medline, Embase and PsychInfo. Classic papers in the field of psychiatric ethics and their references were manually searched. Papers were selected for relevance to the topic of the dual-role dilemma in relation to psychiatry.

RESULTS

The dual-role dilemma is most explicitly addressed in the literature on forensic psychiatry and military psychiatry. Review of the ethics literature in other fields of psychiatry indicates many instances of the dilemma of psychiatrists facing conflicting obligations akin to the dual-role problem identified in the literature on forensic psychiatry. Many of these dilemmas are characterized by the presence of a powerful third party to whom the psychiatrist has some perceived obligations.

CONCLUSIONS

In psychiatric ethics, the dual-role dilemma refers to the tension between psychiatrists' obligations of beneficence towards their patients, and conflicting obligations to the community, third parties, other health-care workers, or the pursuit of knowledge in the field. These conflicting obligations transcend a conflict of interest in that the expectations of the psychiatrist, other than the patient's best interests, are so compelling. This tension illustrates how the discourse in psychiatric ethics is embedded in the social and cultural context of the situations encountered. It appears that as society changes in its approach to the value of liberal autonomy and the 'collective good', psychiatrists may also need to change.

The challenges for nurses communicating with and gaining valid consent from adults with intellectual disabilities within the accident and emergency care service

AIM

This paper reports the challenges experienced by nurses within accident and emergency departments in communicating with and gaining valid consent from adults with intellectual disabilities.

BACKGROUND

Consent is both a legal requirement and an ethical principle required to be obtained by health-care professionals, prior to the start of any examination, treatment and/or care. Central to the process of seeking consent is effective communication. However, evidence shows that people with intellectual disabilities are not viewed by professionals within acute general hospitals as a vital source of information, neither are they often communicated with directly, nor involved in discussions or decisions about their health care and are frequently not directly asked for their consent.

METHOD

A purposive sample of nurses working within the accident and emergency departments of five general hospitals was recruited to participate in this qualitative study. Data were collected from five focus groups.

FINDINGS

Effective communication was identified as the most challenging aspect in caring for adults with intellectual disabilities within this environment, having an impact on the assessment of needs, informing patients of their health status and seeking valid consent.

CONCLUSIONS

Fundamental to the provision of quality care are the concepts communication, choice and control. However, these issues are perceived to be more challenging in the provision of health care to people with intellectual disabilities. Communication and consent, therefore, require further consideration within the educational and clinical areas to strengthen nurses' competence in caring for people with intellectual disabilities, with an emphasis and understanding that choice and control are key principles for all people, being central aspects to the provision of an inclusive service for people with intellectual disabilities.

RELEVANCE TO CLINICAL PRACTICE

All nurses need to have a greater awareness of learning disability, how to increase opportunities for effective communication and be very familiar with the issue and guidelines relating to consent, to ensure that people with learning disabilities have choice, control and are more active in decision making regarding their health.

Ethical issues in child psychopharmacology research and practice: emphasis on preschoolers

INTRODUCTION

Psychoactive drug prescription for preschoolers has increased over the past decade and has been a controversial topic for those who prescribe, regulate, and research the use of psychotropics in this population. Children and adolescents are deemed vulnerable populations, at risk of being harmed by unethical or suboptimal practice and research and are in need of special protection. Historically, preschoolers have been therapeutic and research "orphans," excluded from pharmacological studies so that the evidence base for their treatment has to be extrapolated from other ages. Within the past few decades, several ethical principles guiding pediatric psychopharmacological research have been developed. The same principles could effectively guide the treatment of these patients.

CONCLUSION

Further studies are needed to elucidate the safety and effectiveness of psychotropics, and sound ethical guidelines for their involvement in psychiatric research are needed. This article reviews some challenges facing mental health care providers involved in prescribing or researching the use of psychoactive drugs in preschoolers. Some of these challenges are general to medical treatment and research with children, and others are particular to child psychopharmacological treatment and research.

Ética em psiquiatria forense: atividades pericial e clínica e pesquisa com prisioneiros

OBJETIVO: Revisar as questões éticas mais relevantes do tripé que compõe a base da prática psiquiátrica forense: a atividade pericial, o tratamento de doentes mentais nas prisões e a pesquisa com sujeitos prisioneiros. RESULTADOS E DISCUSSÃO: Distinguem-se e confrontam-se os princípios da Ética Médica Geral com os da Ética Médica Forense e indicam-se os cuidados que o psiquiatra, tanto na função de perito quanto na de clínico, deve tomar para que os preceitos morais de sua profissão sejam observados. Faz-se, também, breve apanhado histórico da pesquisa com prisioneiros e indicam-se princípios básicos que, se respeitados, possibilitariam um equilíbrio entre a necessidade de realização de pesquisa em ambientes prisionais e a proteção dos direitos dos detentos. CONCLUSÃO: É essencial ao psiquiatra forense o conhecimento e observância dos princípios éticos que regem sua prática para que possa efetivamente respeitar os direitos básicos das pessoas que avalia, trata ou pesquisa.

Inclusion of patients with severe mental illness in clinical trials: issues and recommendations surrounding informed consent

Modern medicine would be unthinkable without the possibility of administering pharmaceuticals and other evidence-based interventions. The development of these interventions requires scientific research, ultimately with human subjects. This venture raises ethical, legal and human rights issues, which are addressed in numerous national and international declarations and regulations. In these documents, special attention is usually directed towards research involving vulnerable groups, such as children, pregnant women, unemployed persons, refugees, patients with psychiatric disorders, dementia or mental retardation, and those who are dying. In relation to patients with psychiatric disorders, two important and mutually connected ethical questions can be posed. Firstly, is research with persons who have severe psychiatric illnesses permissible? And, secondly, how can the mental capacity of prospective research subjects be assessed? We investigate these questions using the Dutch legal system as an example. Regarding the first question, the Dutch Medical-Scientific Research on Human Subjects Act (1998) presents a detailed regulation that is in line with relevant international documents, such as the Convention on Human Rights and Biomedicine (1997). In the Dutch statute, the possibilities for research involving subjects who lack mental capacity are limited, but not completely excluded. Under certain conditions, two types of research are exempted from the general prohibition of research with such subjects that is included in article 4 of the statute. These two types are (i) therapeutic research and (ii) non-therapeutic research that could not take place without the participation of subjects from the category to which the mentally incapacitated person belongs. The conditions pertain to ethical and scientific review, insurance, written proxy consent and respect for resistance by the subject. An extra condition for the permissibility of non-therapeutic research is that the risks for the prospective subject are negligible and the burdens minimal. Although the Dutch regulation obviously does not solve all problems, it is relatively clear when compared with the situation in other European countries, such as Belgium, France, Germany, and England and Wales. Regarding the second question, two basic factors need to be considered when defining 'mental capacity'. These relate to the assumption of competence and to the task-specificity of capacity. The crucial issue in assessing mental capacity is not whether a psychiatric diagnosis is present, but whether the patient has the mental abilities required to make the decision at hand in a meaningful way. In establishing an appropriate standard for capacity assessment, several interests have to be weighed. The ethical demands of protection of subjects and stimulation of scientific research may be balanced by attempting to enhance patients' mental capacity. The procedure of 'experienced consent' seems promising in this regard, although this approach entails its own ethical problems.

Perspectives on medical research involving men in schizophrenia and HIV-related protocols

Ethical issues in research on serious physical and mental illnesses have received great attention, and yet little is known about how the perspectives of clinical research participants with different diagnoses may compare. We conducted a preliminary study to examine the attitudes of men enrolled in schizophrenia-related protocols and in HIV-related protocols regarding the importance of medical research, key aspects of research participation, and the acceptability of research involvement by various groups. A total of 33 men enrolled in schizophrenia protocols and 15 men enrolled in HIV-related protocols volunteered for our study. Respondents affirmed the importance of medical research and endorsed many positive things about participation. Autonomy and altruism were identified as motivators for research involvement. Participation by diverse groups was seen as acceptable. Respondents expressed comfort and little stress with the interview process. Men in different diagnostic groups largely saw the issues the same. Our findings thus suggest that people with schizophrenia and HIV/AIDS who are enrolled in protocols may share a number of core attitudes or beliefs related to ethical aspects of research participation. Further study is needed to explore how research involvement may influence perspectives and whether differences in views exist across people with diverse physical and mental illnesses.

Capacity to consent to research in schizophrenia: the expanding evidence base

Capacity to consent to research, fundamental to informed consent and thus vital to the ethical conduct of research, may be impaired among a variety of research populations. Until recently, relatively little empirical evidence has been available to inform discussion and policy-making regarding whose capacity should be assessed, what should be measured, and how it should be measured. Capacity to consent to research has emerged as a central topic in the field of "empirical ethics," an important area of biomedical research devoted to bringing evidence-based methods to the study of ethically salient issues in biomedical and biopsychosocial research. In this paper, empirical studies of capacity to consent to research are reviewed, with a particular focus on studies involving people with schizophrenia. These studies provide intriguing data regarding the nature, correlates, and modifiability of decisional abilities among potentially vulnerable research populations, including individuals with serious neuropsychiatric illnesses. Areas in need of further empirical ethics research are highlighted.

Meta-consent in research on decisional capacity: a "Catch-22"?

Empirical studies of ethical issues, which have increased in number and scope in recent years, may themselves raise both practical and ethical issues. One example of such an issue is the question of who may be legitimately enrolled in studies of decision-making capacity; must all participants in studies of consent capacity have capacity to consent? This question may pose a "Catch-22": For example, if some of the participants in a study of consent capacity are deemed by a particular standard to be incapable of consent. In weighing the risks and benefits of studies of consent capacity, how should reviewers consider the context of actual versus hypothetical trials for which the participant's consent is being sought? Here, we explore these "meta-consent" issues by describing the dimensions of the issue and potential solutions, centering around the concept of "active assent" (requiring expressed understanding of the purpose of the study and its voluntary nature, as well as expression of a choice to participate).

Do research procedures pose relatively greater risk for healthy persons than for persons with schizophrenia?

Federal regulations governing human research suggest that potential harms and discomforts of research be considered in relation to the risks normally encountered in daily life or in routine examinations. No data regarding relative risks of research exist for persons with schizophrenia. We surveyed psychiatrists (N = 68) to assess their perceptions of the risk associated with 12 research procedures in 2 categories, that is, evaluation- and intervention-type procedures. Psychiatrists were asked to rate "risks compared to usual daily risks" for people with schizophrenia and, separately, for healthy people. For healthy research volunteers, psychiatrists rated 2 of 5 evaluation procedures and none of the intervention procedures as posing fewer risks than daily life. One evaluation procedure and 2 intervention procedures were rated as similar to daily risks for healthy research volunteers. For volunteers with schizophrenia, psychiatrists rated 4 of the 5 evaluation procedures and 1 intervention procedure as conferring less risk than everyday life. For 1 of 5 evaluation procedures and 5 of 7 intervention procedures, the risks associated with the procedures were centered close to the benchmark for those faced every day by persons with schizophrenia. Psychiatrists in this study viewed research procedure risks as closer to the daily risks encountered by persons with schizophrenia than by healthy persons. Because federal regulations benchmark research studies as "minimal risk" if they are analogous to the usual risks of everyday life, this finding may have important implications for the evaluation of psychiatric protocols.

Views of people with schizophrenia regarding aspects of research: study size and funding sources

Serious mental illness research poses many ethical questions, including important considerations pertaining to how large a study is and its source of funding. Little is known about how people with schizophrenia understand these ethical considerations and whether these factors may influence their decisions to participate in research. Structured interviews were conducted with 60 people with schizophrenia. Participants were asked about levels of suffering and the importance of research for healthy people and for people with serious illnesses. Participants also rated helpfulness and harmfulness to society, and their likelihood of participating in studies involving 10 subjects, 1000 subjects, 1 research institution, or 10 research institutions and in studies funded by various organizations. Participants viewed all types of research positively and indicated willingness to volunteer. Likelihood of participating in research was correlated with perceived helpfulness to society and inversely correlated with perceived harmfulness. Research by pharmaceutical companies was seen as less helpful to society than research sponsored by federal or state government or by private foundations. Larger studies conducted at multiple sites were seen as more helpful to society than smaller studies or those at single sites. Larger studies conducted at single sites, however, were seen as more harmful. Respondents endorsed a positive view of medical research and expressed a willingness to participate in projects of all scales with diverse funding sources. The pattern of responses suggests the capacity for a nuanced understanding of ethically salient aspects of medical research by individuals with schizophrenia.

Decisional capacity in mental illness and substance use disorders: empirical database and policy implications

Debates on decisional capacity in people with mental illnesses or substance use disorders have tended to be heated. Yet, they are often based not on empirical data but on personal opinions and experiences. The empirical database in this area is quite limited, but has been growing in recent years. The following discussion focuses on relevant clinical investigations. We consider variations across and within different diagnoses, barriers to decision-making, methods for assessing capacity-interview versus instruments, choosing from among different capacity instruments, decisional capacity-is it a state or a trait?, triggers for assessment of decisional capacity, methods for enhancing capacity, and decisional capacity in people with substance use disorders. Finally, we discuss some relevant health policy recommendations.