IRBIS does NOT generate these documents with application-specific information.
Concise Summary examples can be found here .
Guidance on the use of plain language in consent forms:
There are a few additional forms that are not provided online and may be accessed below. As needed, these should be completed and uploaded to your IRB application.
COVID-19 Related Forms:
Informed Consent Short Form (for a single subject who may be illiterate, or otherwise unable to read the consent form — used when full consent form has to be read or translated for subject).
UCL Research Ethics
Recruitment documents help people make informed choices about whether to participate in a research study. Find out how to write a Participant Information Sheet, example forms and further guidance.
Participant Information Sheets must be designed to assist participants to make informed choices. Potential recruits must be given sufficient information to allow them to decide whether or not they want to take part. The process of obtaining consent and the accompanying documentation must be approved by a research ethics committee and, where only verbal consent to research is contemplated include consideration of an appropriate process for witnessing the consent.
Researchers must take the steps necessary to ensure that all participants in the research understand the process in which they are to be engaged, including why their participation is necessary, how it will be used, and how and to whom it will be reported so that the prospective participant can make an informed decision about whether they really do want to take part.
It is highly recommended that the information provided is presented on headed paper and is accurate, clear and simple so that someone with a reading age of 8 would understand the contents (use short words, sentences and paragraphs). The information should be specific to the proposed research and appropriate for the social and cultural context in which is it being given. It is important to avoid technical terms, jargon and abbreviations, bias, coercion or any inappropriate inducements.
It is highly recommended that the information provided is presented on headed paper and is accurate, clear, and simple. The information should be specific to the proposed research and appropriate for the social and cultural context in which is it being given. It is important to avoid technical terms, jargon, and abbreviations, bias, coercion, or any inappropriate inducements.
The following points should be considered when writing an information sheet:
Ask someone else to review your information sheet before it is circulated.
Page last updated: June 2024
Informed consent is a communication process by which researchers reach agreement with people about whether they wish to participate in research. Confusing informed consent with a signed consent form may violate the ethical intent of informed consent, which is to communicate clearly and respectfully, to foster trust, comprehension, and good decision making, and to ensure that participation is voluntary.
Consent forms are often written in “legalese” and are long, complex, and often inappropriate to the culture or language of the potential subject, insulting, and virtually impossible for most people to comprehend. They convey to some the impression that signing such a formal-looking document commits them to participation. Among subjects who willingly sign documents, most sign the consent form without reading it.
How has this come to pass? Early concern with ethics of human research was about biomedical research and focused on the necessity of obtaining informed consent. Over the decades, the elements of informed consent have grown in number, as has the idea that informed consent is a form that is to be signed by the subject. According to the Federal Regulation of Human Research 46.117(a):
Except as provided in paragraph (c) of this section, informed consent shall be documented by the use of a written consent form approved by the IRB and signed by the subject or the subject’s legally authorized representative. A copy shall be given to the person signing the form.
However, many researchers and the Institutional Review Boards that govern their research fail to recognize that 46.117(c) provides for a waiver of signed consent forms:
(c) An IRB may waive the requirement for the investigator to obtain a signed consent form for some or all subjects if it finds either: (1) That the only record linking the subject and the research would be the consent document and the principal risk would be potential harm resulting from a breach of confidentiality. Each subject will be asked whether the subject wants documentation linking the subject with the research, and the subject’s wishes will govern, or (2) That the research presents no more than minimal risk of harm to subjects and involves no procedures for which written consent is normally required outside of the research context.
The reason for obtaining a signed consent form has always been much more to protect the researcher and the institution than to serve the interests of the research subject. In case the subject claims later that consent was inadequate or omitted, the researcher can counter by showing the form. Recently, the Office of Human Research Protection has imposed highly publicized and costly sanctions against a few research institutions. Understandably, IRBs and research administrators consider it in their self-interest to make highly conservative decisions. Since IRBs must take steps to justify waiving documentation of informed consent by deeming the research to be minimal risk, many consider it safer not to do so, fearing that such an action might leave them open to questions by the OHRP. Thus, the reason for obtaining a signed consent form is typically to protect the institution, not the subject. Researchers, science, institutions, subjects, and IRBs would all be better off if they made intelligent interpretations of the requirements of the Common Rule.
The Social and Behavioral Sciences Working Group has made various recommendations based on the Common Rule, designed to guide social and behavioral researchers and IRBs out of such conundrums. The authors, both members of the Working Group, developed recommendations concerning informed consent, some of which are summarized here:
1. Informed consent should take the form of an open, easily understood communication process. Typically, this means a friendly verbal exchange between researcher and subject, with a written summary of the information for the subject to keep, as appropriate. (The copy for the subject to keep would be inappropriate if the written record of the subject’s participation could be damaging to the subject, as when the research is about domestic violence, or illegal behavior). Both the verbal and written discussion should be brief, and simply phrased at such a level that all of the subjects can understand it.
2. Subjects must receive enough easily understood, accurate information to judge whether the risk or inconvenience involved is at a level they can accept. The responsibility rests with the investigator to describe any risks accurately and understandably. There are many kinds of minor or everyday risks or inconveniences that most persons would gladly undertake if it were their choice to do so, but which they would not wish to have imposed upon them unilaterally. However, some may make a rational decision that the experience would be too stressful, risky, or unpleasant for some idiosyncratic reason that applies to them and not to other subjects.
3. Especially when the research procedure is long and complex, the researcher must make it quite clear that the subject is free to ask questions at any time. Informed consent, as a conversation (not a form), needs to be available throughout the research, as subjects do not necessarily develop questions or concerns about their participation until they are well into the research experience. For example, a discussion of confidentiality may not capture subjects’ attention or comprehension until they are asked some quite personal questions in the ensuing research experience.
4. When subjects can readily refuse to participate by hanging up the phone or tossing out a mailed survey, the informed consent can be extremely brief (a sentence or two). Courtesy and professionalism require that the identity of the researcher and research institution be mentioned, along with the nature and purpose of the research. However, if there are no risks, benefits, or confidentiality issues involved, these topics and the right to refuse to participate need not be mentioned, as such details would be gratuitous and might decrease participation by implying greater risk that actually exists. If the researcher has any connection with the institution at which the subjects receive health care or other essential services, it is necessary to mention the right of the research subject to refuse or withdraw without prejudice. Such rights may be honored implicitly by making it clear that you are asking their permission to involve them as research subjects.
5. Verbal informed consent need not be detailed and written consent is not appropriate when the research is not concerned with sensitive personal information and when subjects are peers or superiors of the researcher.
6. The cultural norms and life-styles of subjects should be considered when deciding how to approach informed consent. For example, research on homeless injection drug users should probably be preceded by a several week-long process of “hanging out” and talking with them. The resulting informal communication will raise issues they wish to discuss with the researcher. The conditions under which the research is conducted can then be negotiated orally between the researcher and the community members, as appropriate. Written documents and signed forms would expose subjects to risk of arrest and serve no redeeming purpose.
7. A wide range of media are appropriate for administering informed consent. Video tapes, brochures, group discussions, web sites, community newsletters, and the “grape vine” can be more appropriate ways of communicating with potential subjects than the potentially confusing formal consent forms that often are used.
8. When written or signed consent places subjects at risk, it must be waived. There are times when the written record is the only evidence that the subject has participated in a study in which there is acknowledgement or appearance of situations that would place the subject at risk.
9. When it is important to have some record of the informed consent but when written or signed consent would place the subject at risk or be difficult for the subject to read, one useful procedure is to have a trusted colleague witness the verbal consent.
10. Community consultation, or meeting with community leaders of the potential subjects, is a useful way to plan research that is likely to raise sensitive questions among those to be studied and members of their community. This is not a substitute for individual informed consent, but often clears the way for potential subjects to be ready to decide whether to participate.
11. In certain circumstances, persons are not in a position to decide whether to consent until immediately after their participation, e.g., in brief sidewalk interviews, which persons are likely to welcome.
12. Some research cannot validly be conducted if all details are disclosed at the outset. The alternatives to outright deception of subjects are to a) obtain permission to provide only a description of what the subject will experience, with an agreement that the full details of the study will be disclosed afterward; b) obtain permission to engage in concealment or deception with the understanding that pilot research has shown that peers of the subject do not find such concealment or deception objectionable and that a full explanation will follow their participation, c) explain that the subject might be enrolled in one of several possible conditions and to gain permission to disclose in which of these the subject was actually enrolled after his or her participation is completed.
Author’s Note: The Social and Behavioral Sciences Working Group (formerly a part of the National Human Research Protections Advisory Council but now an independent body) chaired by Felice Levine helped to develop these ideas.
Reference Melton, G., Levine, R. J., Koocher, G., Rosethal, R., & Thompson, W. (1988). Community Consultation in Socially Sensitive Research: Lessons from Clinical Trials on Treatments for AIDS. American Psychologist , 43, 573-581.
APS regularly opens certain online articles for discussion on our website. Effective February 2021, you must be a logged-in APS member to post comments. By posting a comment, you agree to our Community Guidelines and the display of your profile information, including your name and affiliation. Any opinions, findings, conclusions, or recommendations present in article comments are those of the writers and do not necessarily reflect the views of APS or the article’s author. For more information, please see our Community Guidelines .
Please login with your APS account to comment.
Joan Sieber is professor of psychology at California State University, Hayward. She received her bachelor's, master's, and doctorate from the University of Delaware. Robert J. Levine is professor of medicine and co-chair of the interdisciplinary bioethics project at Yale University. He is also the founding editor of IRB: A Review of Human Subjects Research.
In a guest column, APS Fellow Barbara Wanchisen shares observations and ideas on broadening career opportunities for psychological scientists.
Feeling unsure or overwhelmed as an early-career psychology student? Second-year graduate student Mariel Barnett shares advice to quell uncertainties.
APS President Wendy Wood discusses how graduate programs can change the habit of focusing on academic-career preparation.
Cookie | Duration | Description |
---|---|---|
__cf_bm | 30 minutes | This cookie, set by Cloudflare, is used to support Cloudflare Bot Management. |
Cookie | Duration | Description |
---|---|---|
AWSELBCORS | 5 minutes | This cookie is used by Elastic Load Balancing from Amazon Web Services to effectively balance load on the servers. |
Cookie | Duration | Description |
---|---|---|
at-rand | never | AddThis sets this cookie to track page visits, sources of traffic and share counts. |
CONSENT | 2 years | YouTube sets this cookie via embedded youtube-videos and registers anonymous statistical data. |
uvc | 1 year 27 days | Set by addthis.com to determine the usage of addthis.com service. |
_ga | 2 years | The _ga cookie, installed by Google Analytics, calculates visitor, session and campaign data and also keeps track of site usage for the site's analytics report. The cookie stores information anonymously and assigns a randomly generated number to recognize unique visitors. |
_gat_gtag_UA_3507334_1 | 1 minute | Set by Google to distinguish users. |
_gid | 1 day | Installed by Google Analytics, _gid cookie stores information on how visitors use a website, while also creating an analytics report of the website's performance. Some of the data that are collected include the number of visitors, their source, and the pages they visit anonymously. |
Cookie | Duration | Description |
---|---|---|
loc | 1 year 27 days | AddThis sets this geolocation cookie to help understand the location of users who share the information. |
VISITOR_INFO1_LIVE | 5 months 27 days | A cookie set by YouTube to measure bandwidth that determines whether the user gets the new or old player interface. |
YSC | session | YSC cookie is set by Youtube and is used to track the views of embedded videos on Youtube pages. |
yt-remote-connected-devices | never | YouTube sets this cookie to store the video preferences of the user using embedded YouTube video. |
yt-remote-device-id | never | YouTube sets this cookie to store the video preferences of the user using embedded YouTube video. |
yt.innertube::nextId | never | This cookie, set by YouTube, registers a unique ID to store data on what videos from YouTube the user has seen. |
yt.innertube::requests | never | This cookie, set by YouTube, registers a unique ID to store data on what videos from YouTube the user has seen. |
General consent form to participate in research (DOC)
Two stage project consent form (DOC)
Parent permission form for research with child (DOC)
Child assent form (DOC)
Multiple consent form including audio-recording and quotations (DOC)
Photo and video consent form (DOC)
Video-recording consent form (DOC)
Re-contact agreement form (DOC)
Post-debriefing consent form (DOC)
As the nation’s largest public research university, the Office of the Vice President for Research (OVPR) aims to catalyze, support and safeguard U-M research and scholarship activity.
The Office of the Vice President for Research oversees a variety of interdisciplinary units that collaborate with faculty, staff, students and external partners to catalyze, support and safeguard research and scholarship activity.
ORSP manages pre-award and some post-award research activity for U-M. We review contracts for sponsored projects applying regulatory, statutory and organizational knowledge to balance the university's mission, the sponsor's objectives, and the investigator's intellectual pursuits.
Ethics and compliance in research covers a broad range of activity from general guidelines about conducting research responsibly to specific regulations governing a type of research (e.g., human subjects research, export controls, conflict of interest).
eResearch is U-M's site for electronic research administration. Access: Regulatory Management (for IRB or IBC rDNA applications); Proposal Management (eRPM) for the e-routing, approval, and submission of proposals (PAFs) and Unfunded Agreements (UFAs) to external entities); and Animal Management (for IACUC protocols and ULAM).
Sponsored Programs manages the post-award financial activities of U-M's research enterprise and other sponsored activities to ensure compliance with applicable federal, state, and local laws as well as sponsor regulations. The Office of Contract Administration (OCA) is also part of the Office of Finance - Sponsored Programs.
U-m hrpp informed consent information.
See the HRPP Operations Manual, Part 3, Section III, 6 e .
The human subjects in your project must participate willingly , having been adequately informed about the research.
Contact the IRB Office for more information .
See the Waiver Guidelines for information about, and policies regarding, waivers for informed consent or informed consent documentation.
See the updated Basic Informed Consent Elements document for a list of 2018 Common Rule basic and additional elements.
Informed consent is the process of telling potential research participants about the key elements of a research study and what their participation will involve. The informed consent process is one of the central components of the ethical conduct of research with human subjects. The consent process typically includes providing a written consent document containing the required information (i.e., elements of informed consent) and the presentation of that information to prospective participants.
In most cases, investigators are expected to obtain a signature from the participant on a written informed consent document (i.e., to document the consent to participate) unless the IRB has waived the consent requirement or documentation (signature) requirement .
An informed consent document is typically used to provide subjects with the information they need to make a decision to volunteer for a research study. Federal regulations ( 45 CFR 46.116 ) provide the framework for the type of information (i.e., the "elements") that must be included as part of the consent process. New with the revised 2018 Common Rule is the requirement that the consent document begin with a "concise and focused" presentation of key information that will help potential participants understand why they might or might not want to be a part of a research study.
The image below displays the five elements identified in the preamble to the revised Final Rule as suggested key information.
Note: Element number 5 (alternative procedures) applies primarily to clinical research.
Reading level.
Informed consent documents should be written in plain language at a level appropriate to the subject population, generally at an 8th grade reading level . A best practice is to have a colleague or friend read the informed consent document for comprehension before submission with the IRB application. Always:
For guidance on using plain language, examples, and more, visit: http://www.plainlanguage.gov/
The informed consent document should succinctly describe the research as it has been presented in the IRB application.
IRB-HSBS strongly recommends that investigators use one of the informed consent templates developed to include the required consent elements (per 45 CFR 46.116 ), as well as other required regulatory and institutional language. The templates listed below include the new consent elements outlined in the 2018 Common Rule.
PDF. Lists the basic and additional elements required for inclusion or to be included, as appropriate to the research, in the informed consent documentation, along with the citiation number [e.g., _0116(b)(1)] within the revised Common Rule. New elements associated with the 2018 Common Rule are indicated in bold text.
Strongly recommended for studies that involve the collection of biospecimens and/or genetic or genomic analysis, particularly federally sponsored clinical trials that are required to post a consent document on a public website. Last updated: 04/10/2024.
Informed Consent documents are not reviewed by the IRB for Exempt projects. However, researchers are ethically bound to conduct a consent process with subjects. This template is suggested for use with Exempt projects. Last updated 4/17/24
(Word) Blank template with 2018 revised Common Rule key information and other required informed consent elements represented as section headers; includes instructions and recommended language. It is strongly advised that you modify this template to draft a project-specific informed consent document for your study for IRB review and approval. Last updated: 04/10/2024
(Word) General outline to create and post a flyer seeking participation in a human subjects study. Includes instructions.
(Word) Two sample letters for site approval cooperation between U-M and other institutions, organizations, etc. Letters of cooperation must be on U-M letterhead and signed by an appropriate official. These letters are uploaded into the Performance Site section of the eResearch IRB application.
For use by U-M Dearborn faculty, staff, and students conducting non-exempt human subjects research using subject pools. Last updated 4/10/24
For use by U-M Dearborn faculty, staff, and students conducting exempt human subjects research using subject pools
Researchers who will conduct data collection that is subject to the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) must use this template in tandem with a general consent for participation template/document.
Phone: (734) 936-0933 Fax: (734) 936-1852 [email protected]
The informed consent form puts you in control of your health decisions and protects your rights.
Before you join a cancer research study, you’ll receive an informed consent form to review, ask questions about, and sign. The form covers a description of the study’s purpose, procedures and safety measures researchers will follow, and what is expected of study participants.
The form is part of the informed consent process. This process protects your rights. It also gives you control over your choice to take part in research.
Federal law requires that researchers give the informed consent form to potential participants. You will have a chance to ask questions about information you read in the form. Once you understand the study, you can choose if you want to sign the consent form and take part.
Understanding a consent form is an important part of the informed consent process. All informed consent forms are different. But most forms will have the same kinds of information about the study divided into sections.
Overview of study This section tells you:
The overview also describes the choices you have if you do not take part in the study. And it explains the reasons you might leave the study early. This section also lets you know that taking part is voluntary and you may leave the study at any time.
Study design This section describes:
Risks and benefits This section describes:
Cost This section explains the costs of taking part in a study. Insurance and the study sponsor should cover some expenses. But you might have others, such as the cost of travel to the trial site. Learn more about who pays for clinical trials .
Explore the many safety measures in place to help keep you safe during a trial or study.
Your rights This section covers your rights:
How to get more information on the study This section provides ways to:
Signature As with most legal documents, informed consent forms require a signature. But it’s important to remember that you are not signing away your rights or binding yourself to the study. You may still leave the study at any time. If a participant is under 18 years of age, read about the children’s assent process .
Read a sample consent form to become familiar with the content and sections. Note: this form is for informational purposes only and does not represent a real study. Your form may have other sections, and may present the information in a different way.
Amy Rose oversees the day-to-day operations of clinical research, including the informed consent process for potential research participants. She is the associate director in Clinical Research Services at University of Pittsburgh Medical Center Hillman Cancer Center.
If you are thinking about taking part in a clinical trial, Amy suggests that you:
The informed consent process does not end when you sign a form and decide to take part. Your doctor and study team will keep you updated about the study so you can continue to make informed decisions.
Connect with our cancer information specialists.
Phone: 1-800-4-CANCER Chat: LiveHelp Email: [email protected]
Available Monday–Friday 9:00 a.m. to 9:00 p.m. ET.
An official website of the United States government
The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.
The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.
Preview improvements coming to the PMC website in October 2024. Learn More or Try it out now .
1 University of Messina, “G. Martino” Hospital, Messina, Italy
2 University of Pavia, Fondazione IRCCS Policlinico San Matteo, Pavia, Italy
Current biomedical research on human subjects requires clinical trial, which is defined as “any research study that prospectively assigns human participants or groups of humans to one or more health-related interventions [ i.e. drugs, cells or other biological products, surgical procedures, devices] to evaluate the effects on health outcomes” [1]. In our modern ethical conception, all research conducted on humans must be pre-emptively accepted by the subjects themselves through the procedure known as informed consent, which is a process by which “a subject voluntarily confirms his or her willingness to participate in a particular trial, after having been informed of all aspects of the trial that are relevant to the subject’s decision to participate”, as stated in the International Council for Harmonisation Good Clinical Practice guidelines [2]. Informed consent is documented by means of a written, signed and dated informed consent form. This form is required in the following cases: 1) when the research involves patients, children, incompetent/incapacitated persons, healthy volunteers, immigrants or others ( e.g. prisoners); 2) when the research uses/collects human genetic material, biological samples or personal data [3].
The process of obtaining informed consent for clinical trials is tightly regulated; complications arise in circumstances when consent may be waived, or when needed from vulnerable populations http://ow.ly/rEMe30j5MVq
Current biomedical research on human subjects requires clinical trial, which is defined as “any research study that prospectively assigns human participants or groups of humans to one or more health-related interventions [ i.e. drugs, cells or other biological products, surgical procedures, devices] to evaluate the effects on health outcomes” [ 1 ]. In our modern ethical conception, all research conducted on humans must be pre-emptively accepted by the subjects themselves through the procedure known as informed consent, which is a process by which “a subject voluntarily confirms his or her willingness to participate in a particular trial, after having been informed of all aspects of the trial that are relevant to the subject’s decision to participate”, as stated in the International Council for Harmonisation Good Clinical Practice guidelines [ 2 ]. Informed consent is documented by means of a written, signed and dated informed consent form. This form is required in the following cases: 1) when the research involves patients, children, incompetent/incapacitated persons, healthy volunteers, immigrants or others ( e.g. prisoners); 2) when the research uses/collects human genetic material, biological samples or personal data [ 3 ].
The informed consent form must be written in language easily understood by the subjects, it must minimise the possibility of coercion or undue influence, and the subject must be given sufficient time to consider participation. However, informed consent is not merely a form that is signed, but is a process in which the subject has an understanding of the research and its risks, and it is tightly described in ethical codes and regulations for human subject research [ 2 ].
The voluntary expression of the consent by a competent subject and the adequate information disclosure about the research are critical and essential elements of the informed consent process [ 4 ]. Competent subjects able to comprehend the research-related information should personally decide and provide the consent on research participation. Conditions posing practical challenges in obtaining informed consent from the real subject may include situations of medical emergency or obtaining consent from “vulnerable” subjects and/or children [ 5 ].
Research-related information must be presented to enable people to voluntarily decide whether or not to participate as a research subject. For an ethically valid consent, information provided to a research subject should include, but not be limited to: information about the health condition for which the research is proposed; details of the nature and purpose of the research; the expected duration of the subject’s participation; a detailed description of study treatment or intervention and of any experimental procedures (including, in the case of randomised clinical trials (RCTs), also blinding and randomisation); a statement that participation in research is voluntary; probable risks and benefits associated with research participation; details of the nature of the illness and possible outcome if the condition is left untreated; availability, risks and benefits of alternative treatments; information about procedures adopted for ensuring data protection/confidentiality/privacy, including duration of storage of personal data; details about the handling of any incidental findings of the research; description of any planned genetic tests; details of insurance coverage in case of injury; reference contacts for any further answers to pertinent questions about the research and the subject’s rights and in case of any research-related injury to the subject; and any other information that seems necessary for an informed decision to be taken by the subject. Of particular importance, a statement offering the subject the opportunity to withdraw at any time from the research without consequences must be provided during the information disclosure [ 2 ]. Specific information should be provided in case of research projects involving children, incapacitated adults not able to give informed consent, illiterate populations, etc. (as will be described later in this article).
The information about the research should be given by a physician or by other individuals ( i.e. researchers) with appropriate scientific training and qualifications [ 6 ]. Furthermore, the location where the informed consent is being discussed, and the subject’s physical, emotional and psychological capability, must be taken into consideration when taking consent from a human subject.
After institutional review board (IRB) or independent ethics committee approval is achieved, obtaining informed consent from each human subject prior to his/her participation in clinical trial is mandatory [ 5 ]. However, when specific circumstances occur, the informed consent can be waived, and “research without consent” is possible, which allows enrolment of patients without their consent, under strict regulation [ 7 ]. In order that research without consent is considered justifiable, the following three conditions have to be met: 1) it is impracticable to obtain consent, 2) the research does not infringe the principle of self-determination, and 3) the research provides significant clinical relevance [ 8 ].
The first condition, of “impracticability”, occurs when obtaining informed consent is burdened by high impact in terms of time and economic resources or could compromise the study’s validity [ 8 ]. The second condition means that, although physicians are requested to ensure that the patient has understood the aim of the research and the risks and/or benefits associated with study participation, the researchers are also advised to respect the patient’s decision-making capacity, not interfering with his/her decisions and acting always in the patient’s best interest [ 9 ]. The third condition leads to justification of waiving consent when the clinical relevance and public health importance are potentially high [ 8 ].
The formal literature identifies different types of RCTs and classifies them into three macro-areas: 1) RCTs based on infeasibility of informed consent; 2) RCTs that omit informed consent only for control groups; and 3) RCTs that omit informed consent entirely.
Emergency clinical studies, involving critically ill subjects, represent an exception to the requirement of informed consent. The investigated life-saving therapy and the medical intervention may be required immediately, not permitting the researchers to wait and respect all procedures of obtaining informed consent. Within this context, the researchers will be able to proceed with patient recruitment, also without the subject’s consent to treatment, when, prior to the study, the IRB has ascertained the presence of mandatory conditions ( table 1 ) [ 10 ].
Conditions to be met in emergency clinical study
• Subjects affected by a life-threatening condition |
• The treatment is experimental |
• The clinical research allows verification of both the effectiveness and safety of the treatment |
• It is impracticable to obtain consent |
• The waiver of informed consent is needed for the clinical trial |
• The researcher will contact the legally authorised representative |
• The family members can decline the patient’s participation in the study |
Cluster randomised studies include cluster-cluster and individual-cluster research [ 11 ]. In cluster-cluster designs ( e.g. studies on infectious disease prevention), the intervention involves the entire target community, so that single subjects cannot refuse it [ 12 ]. Conversely, in individual-cluster designs ( e.g. studies on primary care), although the intervention involves all the selected community, the right to refuse treatment is allowed. Under this circumstance, the omission of informed consent is justified only when the treatment refusal undermines the validity of the research study and/or procedures [ 13 ].
In Zelen’s single-consent model ( e.g. RCTs in infectious or oncological diseases), randomisation occurs prior to any consent, and informed consent is sought only from individuals assigned to experimental treatment [ 14 ]. In the control group, the physicians do not make substantial changes in routine patient care, so informed consent is not required for patient enrolment [ 8 ].
In order to improve study recruitment, Zelen developed the double-consent design. Specifically, informed consent is requested for subjects to be involved in the study but not for the randomisation, preventing psychological distress [ 14 ].
In follow-up studies, the nested consent model ( e.g. for single cohort studies) or cohort multiple RCTs model ( e.g. for multiple cohort studies) is applied. In these variants, patients give their consent for prospective follow-up; however, they remain blinded to any randomised experimental interventions [ 15 ].
In trials using the model of “consent to postponed information”, the informed consent process is carried out after the study is completed [ 16 ].
All these RCT types aim to avoid unnecessary stress in patients who will not receive the new promising experimental treatment. Moreover, these clinical study designs do not affect the standard therapeutic approach or infringe the rights of the patients in the control group; therefore, the clinical trial can proceed without obtaining informed consent [ 8 ].
Based on the fact that patients are assigned to standard care interventions, no informed consent is sought either in low-risk pragmatic RCTs [ 17 ] or in prompted optional randomisation trials [ 18 , 19 ]. However, in a low-risk pragmatic RCT, patients do not have the possibility to choose one of the two standard treatments, whereas in a prompted optional randomisation trial, both the researchers and the enrolled patients can choose one type of treatment over another, despite the randomisation results [ 6 ].
A “vulnerable population” is defined as a disadvantaged community subgroup unable to make informed choices, protect themselves from inherent or intended risks, or keep their own interests safeguarded [ 20 ]. In the health domain, “vulnerable populations” refers to physical vulnerability ( e.g. pregnant women, fetuses, children, orphans, students, employees, prisoners, the military, and those who are chronically or terminally ill), psychological vulnerability (cognitively and intellectually impaired individuals) and social vulnerability (those who are homeless, from ethnic minorities, are immigrants or refugees) [ 20 ].
Due to a compromised free will and inability to make conscious decisions, several ethical dilemmas (related to communications, privacy and treatment) often arise when research involves these populations. Guaranteeing protection of rights, safety, data privacy and confidentiality of vulnerable subjects are prerogatives of good clinical practice, and law dispositions are regulated and strictly monitored by the applicable authorities [ 21 ].
For a long time, pregnant women were excluded from clinical research because of their “vulnerability”. Although pregnant women are able to make informed and conscious choices, they have been considered “vulnerable” due to the potential risks to the fetus, who is also considered as a “patient” [ 22 ]. More recently, with the consideration of pregnant women as “scientifically complex” rather than “vulnerable” subjects, it has been permitted to involve this category in research trials [ 23 ]. The “scientific complexity” reflects both ethical and physiological complexity. The ethical aspects are secondary to the need to find a balance between interests of the fetus and the mother. The physiological aspects are strictly related to the pregnancy status [ 24 ].
Research studies involving pregnant women and fetuses have to satisfy specific federal regulations ( table 2 ). The following appropriate precautions should be taken in research studies involving pregnant women: no pregnant woman may be involved as a subject in a human clinical research project unless the purpose of the research is to meet the health needs of the mother and the fetus will be placed at risk only to the minimum extent necessary to meet such needs, or the risk to the fetus is minimal [ 25 ].
Conditions to be met in research studies involving pregnant women and fetuses
• studies have also been conducted on pregnant animals |
• Clinical studies have been conducted on nonpregnant women |
• Clinical findings assessing potential harms to pregnant women and fetuses are available |
• The risk to the fetus is minimal and caused exclusively by the procedure/intervention |
• The study will achieve crucial knowledge not obtainable by any other means |
• The researchers will have no part in any decision influencing fetal viability or pregnancy |
• No incentive will be provided to influence the course of pregnancy |
Researchers can enrol pregnant women only when the mother and/or the father are legally competent. In fact, the consent to participate in research may be either self-directed (only the mother’s consent is required) or made with the guidance of the woman’s partner. However, the father’s consent need not be obtained when: 1) the research activity is directed to the health needs of the mother; 2) the father’s identity is doubtful; 3) the father is absent; or 4) a pregnancy from rape has occurred [ 26 ]. The consent signature requirements from the mother and father are summarised in table 3 . Once the informed consent is obtained, the pregnant women will be included into any phase of the study unless the research project will be compromised or the patient’s health (mother and/or fetus) will be in danger.
Consent signature requirements for pregnant women and children
Direct benefit to mother | Mother |
Direct benefit to mother and fetus | Mother |
Direct benefit to fetus | Mother and father |
Direct benefit to individual subjects | One parent or guardian |
No direct benefit to individual subjects | Both parents |
No direct benefit to the subject or societal (indirect) benefit | Both parents |
Medical care related to pregnancy | Parental consent is not needed |
Medical care related to mental health treatment, or the diagnosis or treatment of infectious, contagious or communicable diseases | Parental consent is not needed |
Self-sufficient minors | Parental consent is not needed |
Aged ≥15 years | |
Living alone | |
Managing their own financial affairs | |
Emancipated minors | Parental consent is not needed |
Married or divorced | |
On active duty in the US armed forces | |
By a court | |
Having the legal right to consent on their own behalf to medical, dental or mental health treatment |
# : consent requirements are the same whether the risk is “no more than minimal” or “more than minimal”.
Medical students and employees, who take part in numerous aspects of patient care in primary, secondary and tertiary care settings, are often invited to participate in human studies as volunteers. Frequently, the requesting researcher is their supervisor or instructor, who may push them to participate in the study, which can negatively influence their decision and also violate the consent legitimacy. Therefore, in order to protect these subjects against “coercion” or “undue influence”, when an investigator wishes to recruit medical students or employees, they must first obtain IRB approval for inclusion in the study of these vulnerable subgroups [ 27 ].
Prisoners, defined as any individual involuntarily confined or detained in a penal institution, are considered as “vulnerable” because they may be coerced into study participation, and also, due to both cognitive and psychiatric disorders, they can show an impaired ability to provide voluntary informed consent [ 28 ]. To protect this population, the Office for Human Research Protections has stipulated federal regulations according to which the only studies that may involve prisoners are those with independent and valid reasons for involving them ( table 4 ) [ 25 ].
Studies that may involve prisoners
• Studies on the possible causes, processes and effects of incarceration |
• Studies on prisons as institutional structures or on prisoners as incarcerated persons |
• Studies on special conditions affecting prisoners |
• Studies on practices of improving the health or well-being of the prisoners |
• Epidemiological studies |
Due to the context of war in which they work, as well as the critical care setting in which they are treated, military subjects often receive medical care and/or participate in biomedical research under an “implied consent” condition. Moreover, the superior–subordinate relationship contributes to favour coercion or undue influence, making this population vulnerable [ 29 ]. To curb this phenomenon and to ensure that participation is truly voluntary, the US Dept of Defense agencies have adopted requirements similar to those that govern medical research that applies to the civilian population. Accordingly, the medical research recruitment session happens in the absence of superiors, and the informed consent is obtained prior to participating in a medical research study. The presence of an ombudsman guarantees and verifies that the participation is voluntary and that the information provided during recruitment is complete, accurate and clear. A payment as an incentive is acceptable but it must not be used to legitimise a coercive interference. Additional protection is provided to students at service academies, especially those aged <18 years. However, when emergency research is conducted or the research study advances the development of a medical product needed by the armed forces, informed consent will not be required [ 29 ].
Mental disability may compromise the self-determination and decision-making capacities [ 30 ]. Researchers interested in enrolling individuals with cognitive disorders are invited to apply different strategies to promote a better understanding of information-gathering processes. Simplifying the questions and content, adopting supportive technologies, using a more simple language, and spending more time for the information process have been suggested as useful and valid measures. When all these strategies prove to be insufficient, the investigators are required to obtain consent from a legally authorised representative [ 30 ].
Similarly to other vulnerable populations, research involving the homeless, ethnic minorities, immigrants and refugees is regulated by laws and specific procedures. Cultural and language differences, “undocumented” migrant status, and the precarious legal positions of these subjects raise several ethical issues, such as whether the participation is truly voluntary, or there are unrealistic expectations, or any benefits for their “status”.
Obtaining informed consent in these groups is extremely complex. A friendly procedure has been identified as the best way to adequately involve these vulnerable groups. A health centre or community building could represent an accessible location. The reimbursement of travel expenses for applicants can be a valid solution to obtain a representative sample for the clinical research. Clear and simple language, emphasising confidentiality, with the help of professional interpreters, can tempt migrants to sign the consent form. Lastly, the possibility of receiving something back in return for their contribution may enable successful enrolment of migrants in research [ 31 ].
Because of their young age as well as their limited emotional and intellectual abilities, children are considered to be legally incompetent to give valid informed consent; thus, to enrol a child in a research study, the permission by at least one parent or legal representative is mandatory ( table 3 ). For subjects aged <18 years, biological or adoptive parents or legal guardians (persons having both legal capacity and responsibility) can give consent on behalf of their child, exercising free power of choice without any form of coercion. While married mothers and fathers both have parental responsibility, unmarried parents can exert parental responsibility only if they are named individually on the child’s birth certificate. Also, divorced parents maintain parental responsibility, but it is necessary to know to whom the child’s custody has been assigned [ 32 ]. However, on this matter, the European laws and regulations are not harmonised and several discrepancies are present in each country [ 33 ].
Despite potential benefits for the research subjects, the failure of parents to give consent (or their refusal to give consent) is not a rare circumstance [ 34 ]. It can be the case that researchers are dealing with underage parents, so that, although underage parents are responsible for representing their children, as minors themselves they are not considered to be sufficiently mature; therefore, they will be not able to give valid consent. Literacy and socioeconomic levels have been identified as the most common reasons for parental non-response [ 34 ]. Clarity and adequate explanation of research information materials should be part of effective planning to overcome language and social barriers.
In clinical studies in which the adopted methodology constitutes “less than minimal risks” for children, passive parental consent represents a possible way to more easily obtain informed parental consent [ 34 ]. Furthermore, parents can be informed with regard to a possible study involving their children, and, at the time of data collection, only the child’s assent is required. In fact, although the child’s decision-making capacity and understanding of the research project in which he/she will be involved may be limited, the Medical Research Council have shown that, when study details are provided and communicated in a clear and adequate manner, the child can be able to reach a decision and participate consciously in the research [ 35 ]. “Assent” is the term coined to express the child’s willingness to participate in clinical trials despite their young age. The “assent” should include and respect the following key points: 1) helping the child to acquire disease awareness; 2) explaining the potential impact of the experimental treatment; 3) evaluating the child’s ability to understand and adapt to new situations or challenges; and 4) positively influencing the patient’s willingness to participate in clinical trials [ 36 ]. Although the “assent” is not mandatory for research offering a direct benefit for the child, it arises from the need to respect paediatric research subjects [ 37 ]. The evaluation of the capacity to provide the “assent” is based on developmental stage, intellectual abilities and life or disease experience. Usually, the cut-off age of 7 years is used for the beginning of logical thought processes and rational decision making [ 38 ]. However, “assent” for children aged <7 years can be also required once the ability to read and write has been verified [ 32 ]. Figures 1 and and2 2 summarise the parental and assent permission requirements, respectively.
Flow chart of parental permission requirements.
Flow chart of child assent requirements.
When conducting clinical research, the obtaining of informed consent is required. Informed consent is a procedure through which a competent subject, after having received and understood all the research-related information, can voluntarily provide his or her willingness to participate in a clinical trial. However, when it is impracticable to obtain consent, and the research does not infringe the principle of self-determination and also provides significant clinical relevance, the researcher is legally authorised to proceed without informed consent. Furthermore, in order to preserve the self-determination and decision-making rights, specific law dispositions are applied when vulnerable populations are enrolled in clinical trials.
Conflict of interest: None declared.
Search form.
Submissions
Consent and assent form templates.
Sample assent forms, covid-19 screening and testing forms, other forms.
NEW PLAIN LANGUAGE TEMPLATE AND COMPANION DOCUMENT ( October 2023 ) -- The following templates have been replaced by a single Plain Language Consent Template:
The new Plain Language Consent Template has numbered sections. Refer to the Companion Document for guidance and IRB-approved wording for each numbered section. Copy statements from the Companion Document into the consent template as appropriate for your study. Watch the 3-minute demonstration video about how to use the template and Companion Document.
See our Plain Language Informed Consent Form Template Project page for information about the new template and Companion Document, a memo to Sponsors regarding locked consent language, FAQs, and more.
New studies submitted on/after November 15th, 2023, are required to use the new template. See the project website for detailed information about which studies must use the new template.
Note: The templates on this page are appropriate for studies that require expedited or full committee review . There are separate consent templates for exempt research , which includes some research that involves educational tests, surveys, interviews or focus groups.
Plain Language Consent Template
Use this template for:
Last Updated October 2023
Companion Document
This document will help you fill out the Plain Language Consent Template . It includes guidance and IRB-required language.
Telephone Script (Main Study Procedures) -- Use this if you are conducting consent for study procedures over the telephone (verbal consent)
Last Updated May 2022
Telephone Script (Eligibility Screening only) -- Use this if you are conducting consent for study procedures over the telephone (verbal consent)
Last Updated August 2019
Consent Form Addendum (general) - Use if you need to provide new study info to previously enrolled subjects.
Expanded Access Consent Form
General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Addendum template
Last Updated September 2022
Humanitarian Use Device - You may also use the sponsor’s version of the consent form, as long as you modify it to identify the UCSF investigator's name, department, and local contact number and provide the contact number for the UCSF IRB (415-476-1814).
Last Updated May 2022
VA Consent Form 10-1086 Template
VA Phone Script for DocuSign
VA Email Script for DocuSign
See the SFVAHCS page for more information on these forms.
Ensure your consent document follows these general guidelines:
Use the IRB consent form templates
Consent form templates and corresponding documents are available above. These documents are periodically updated by the IRB, so be sure to always use the currently posted templates when developing a new consent form.
Write at an eighth-grade reading level and use lay language vs. medical terminology
Write the consent form at or below an 8th grade reading level. We recommend using the Flesch-Kincaid score tool in Word to measure reading level.
Replace or define scientific or technical terms in lay language. For example, use "blood draw" instead of "venipuncture." See the NCCN Informed Consent Language Database for standardized lay language descriptions of risks and events in clinical research.
You can always verbally describe the study in more detail or using more scientific language during the consent conversation (if appropriate).
Avoid legalistic language
Avoid legal-sounding language, such as "You hereby agree," "You certify that," "You, the undersigned, do acknowledge that," or “You understand that.”
Use gender-inclusive language
Consent language should not assume the reader’s gender or imply there are only two genders. The template language provided by the IRB is non-binary and non-gendered.
Exception: If a study is focused on participants of specific gender identity ( e.g., as an inclusion criterion), it may be appropriate to use gender specific language.
Use the correct forms for parental permission and child assent
In research with children, considerations regarding consent — both process and documentation — become more complex than with adult subjects. See IRB guidance on Children and Minors in Research for information about the documentation needed for consenting children and parents, and use the Sample Consent and Assent Forms for examples of how to write age-appropriate forms.
Give each consent a unique name in iRIS
When uploading consent forms in iRIS, give each consent document a unique name so the IRB can easily identify the forms (e.g. Control Group Consent, Parental Consent, Optional Specimen Collection Consent, Information Sheet, etc.).
Include version dates and numbers in iRIS
iRIS also requires that each consent document have a version date and version number. Please note that every time you modify the consent document, iRIS will automatically update the version number. For example, if you add a revision to version 1.0, iRIS will then create version 1.1. We strongly suggest that you also update the version date when you modify the consent document. If you wish, you can include an internal version number or date in the footer. However, remember to update the date or number each time you revise the document.
Leave 1.25" upper margin for an approval stamp and number each page
Approved consent forms will be stamped in iRIS, and study subjects should sign the stamped version. The approval stamp appears in the upper right-hand corner of each page, so do not include any information in this section of the header. In addition, the upper margin should be at least 1.25" to leave room for the stamp.
After the consent form expires or is superseded, iRIS will automatically void the consent document. If you need a copy for your records, please print out the consent form before it is voided.
Number the pages of every consent document, preferably in a format like "1 of 2," "2 of 2," in the footer of the document.
Age of Children
Last Updated
Assent #1 - For children 7-12 (simple)
Assent #2 - For more complex study, more mature children
Assent #3 - For adolescents 13-17
This section includes forms that can be provided to research participants who attend onsite research visits that require COVID-19 screening or testing per UCSF policy.
Per UCSF policy, pre-visit COVID-19 screening is required.
Currently, pre-visit COVID testing is not required:
As of December 6, 2022, pre-visit COVID-19 testing is no longer required for any clinical or research visits for asymptomatic persons, including those undergoing aerosol-generating procedures (AGPs).
If pre-visit COVID-19 testing becomes required again:
Throughout the pandemic the Office of Research has endeavored to align research-related COVID-19 policies with UCSF Health wherever possible. Therefore, if UCSF Health reinstates the requirement for pre-clinical-visit COVID-19 testing, the Office of Research may again require such testing for pre- research -visit testing as well. In that scenario, research participants will need to be informed about these screening and testing procedures.
The following forms may be given to participants undergoing COVID-19 screening (still required) or testing (if the requirement for testing is reinstated by the Office of Research for the sole purpose of adhering to a UCSF requirement:
|
|
(Spanish) - | Jan 2021 Feb 2022 |
(Spanish) - | Dec 2020 Feb 2022 |
(Spanish) - | May 2022 Feb 2022 |
These forms are specifically designed to be used when COVID-19 screening and/or testing are being done for the sole purpose of adhering to the UCSF Guidance for Onsite Clinical Research Activities, i.e., the screening and/or testing information is not being used for research purposes. The forms should be provided to participants in addition to the main study consent form.
The language in these forms can also be adapted and added to consent forms for studies in which COVID-19 screening and testing procedures are being done for study purposes, i.e., the results of the screening and/or testing will be used as study data. To do this, simply copy the applicable language from these forms and paste it into your own consent form.
Please see the table below for instructions on when and how to use these forms.
| |||
| Use when participants will undergo COVID-19 screening for the sole purpose of adhering to a UCSF requirement for participants to be screened prior to attending an onsite research visit. If there is no such policy in place, this form is not necessary. | Use when participants will undergo RT-PCR COVID-19 testing for the sole purpose of adhering to a UCSF requirement for participants to get an RT-PCR test prior to attending an onsite research visit involving procedures that induce coughing, sneezing, or otherwise increase the risk of aerosolization. If there is no such policy in place, this form is not necessary. Note: The COVID-19 Screening Information Sheet should also be provided in this scenario. | Use when participants will undergo RT-PCR COVID-19 testing for the of adhering to a UCSF requirement for participants to get an RT-PCR test prior to attending an onsite research visit involving procedures that induce coughing, sneezing, or otherwise increase the risk of aerosolization. If there is no such policy in place, this form is not necessary. Note: The COVID-19 Screening Information Sheet should also be provided in this scenario. |
to use this form | Do use this form if COVID-19 screening is a research procedure, if any data from the screening will be used in the research. In such a case, information about screening should be incorporated into the main study consent form. You can use wording from the information sheet and insert it into your consent form as applicable. | Do use this form if the RT-PCR test for COVID-19 is a research procedure, if any data from the test will be used in the research. In such a case, information about testing should be incorporated into the main study consent form. You can incorporate wording from the addendum into your consent form as applicable. | Do use this form if the RT-PCR test for COVID-19 is a research procedure, if any data from the test will be used in the research. In such a case, information about testing should be incorporated into the main study consent form. You can incorporate wording from the addendum into your consent form as applicable. |
| |||
| No. This sheet should be provided to the participant, but it should not be signed. Make a note in the study file that the information sheet was given to the participant. Alternatively, if the study employs a consent form checklist, this step may be added to the consenting checklist to document that the form was given to participants. | Yes. There is a series of signature lines which includes all potential signatures that may apply to your study. Please use only those lines which are appropriate for your study and leave the others blank. | Yes. The person conducting the assent discussion should sign the form as documentation that the assent discussion took place. |
| You do not need to submit these forms to the IRB if you agree to use them exactly as written, with no alterations. They are provided as PDFs for this purpose. It is the PI’s responsibility to ensure that all subjects attending onsite research visits receive the appropriate forms. | ||
| If your study participants will undergo COVID-19 screening and/or testing but you do not want to use these forms , you may: |
and |
(with signature) and |
(Note: UCSF consent form templates incorporate all of the federal requirements.) |
|
Last updated: May 1, 2024
Questions? Ask Andy ( An alyst of the D a y )
Log into iRIS ↗️
iRIS Help site
check your study status
Participating in UCSF Research
iRb SATISFACTION SURVEY
Human Research Protection Program 490 Illinois Street, Floor 6 San Francisco, CA 94158 Phone: (415) 476-1814
Fax: (415) 353-4418 Email: [email protected]
Website Feedback
© 2024 The Regents of the University of California
The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you're on a federal government site.
The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.
On this page you will find information on:
What is Informed Consent
Before enrolling in a clinical trial, the following information must be given to each potential research subject
When Appropriate, one or more of the following elements of information must also be provided in the informed consent document
A potential research subject must have an opportunity to
Informed consent may not include language that
To many, the term informed consent is mistakenly viewed as the same as getting a research participant's signature on the consent form. FDA believes that obtaining a research participant's verbal or written informed consent is only part of the process. Informed consent involves providing a potential participant with:
adequate information to allow for an informed decision about participation in the clinical investigation.
facilitating the potential participant's understanding of the information.
an appropriate amount of time to ask questions and to discuss with family and friends the research protocol and whether you should participate.
obtaining the potential participant's voluntary agreement to participate.
continuing to provide information as the clinical investigation progresses or as the subject or situation requires.
To be effective, the process must provide sufficient opportunity for the participant to consider whether to participate. ( 21 CFR 50.20 .) FDA considers this to include allowing sufficient time for participants to consider the information and providing time and opportunity for the participant to ask questions and have those questions answered. The investigator (or other study staff who are conducting the informed consent interview) and the participant should exchange information and discuss the contents of the informed consent document. This process must occur under circumstances that minimize the possibility of coercion or undue influence. (21 CFR 50.20.)
As new medical products are being developed, no one knows for sure how well they will work, or what risks they will find. Clinical trials are used to answer questions such as:
Are new medical products safe enough to outweigh the risks related to the underlying condition?,
How should the product be used? (for example, the best dose, frequency, or any special precautions necessary to avoid problems),
How effective is the medical product at relieving symptoms, treating or curing a condition.
The main purpose of clinical trials is to “study” new medical products in people. It is important for people who are considering participation in a clinical trial to understand their role, as a “subject of research” and not as a patient.
While research subjects may get personal treatment benefit from participating in a clinical trial, they must understand that they:
may not benefit from the clinical trial,
may be exposed to unknown risks,
are entering into a study that may be very different from the standard medical practices that they currently know
To make an informed decision about whether to participate or not in a clinical trial, people need to be informed about:
what will be done to them,
how the protocol (plan of research) works,
what risks or discomforts they may experience,
participation being a voluntary decision on their part.
This information is provided to potential participants through the informed consent process. Informed consent means that the purpose of the research is explained to them, including what their role would be and how the trial will work.
A central part of the informed consent process is the informed consent document. The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) does not dictate the specific language required for the informed consent document, but does require certain basic elements of consent be included.
A statement explaining that the study involves research.
An explanation of the purposes of the research.
The expected length of time for participation.
A description of all the procedures that will be completed during enrollment on the clinical trial.
Information about all experimental procedures the will be completed during the clinical trial.
A description of any predictable risks.
Any possible discomforts (e.g., injections, frequency of blood test etc.) that could occur as a result of the research.
Any possible benefits that may be expected from the research.
Information about any alternative procedures or treatment (if any) that might benefit the research subject.
A statement describing:
the confidentiality of information collected during the clinical trial,
how records that identify the subject will be kept
the possibility that the FDA may inspect the records.
For research involving more than minimal risk information including
an explanation as to whether any compensation or medical treatments are available if injury occurs,
what they consist of, or
where more information may be found.
questions about the research,
research subjects' rights,
injury related to the clinical trial.
Research subject participation is voluntary,
Research subjects have the right to refuse treatment and will not losing any benefits for which they are entitled,
Research subjects may choose to stop participation in the clinical trial at any time without losing benefits for which they are entitled.
Contact information will be provided for answers to :
A statement that:
A statement that the research treatment or procedure may involve unexpected risks (to the subject, unborn baby, if the subject is or may become pregnant).
Any reasons why the research subject participation may be ended by the clinical trial investigator (e.g., failing to follow the requirements of the trial or changes in lab values that fall outside of the clinical trial limits).
Added costs to the research subject that may result from participating in the trial.
The consequence of leaving a trial before it is completed (e.g. if the research and procedures require a slow and organized end of participation).
A statement that important findings discovered during the clinical trial will be provided to the research subject.
The approximate number of research subjects that will be enrolled in the study.
read the consent document,
ask questions about anything they do not understand.
Usually, if one is considering participating in a clinical trial, he or she may take the consent document home to discuss with family, friend or advocate.
An investigator should only get consent from a potential research subject if:
enough time was given to the research subject to consider whether or not to participate
the investigator has not persuaded or influenced the potential research subject.
The information must be in language that is understandable to the research subject.
the research subject is made to ignore or appear to ignore any of the research subject's legal rights,
releases or appears to release the investigator, the sponsor, the institution, or its agents from their liability for negligence.
Participating in clinical trials is voluntary. You have the right not to participate, or to end your participation in the clinical trial at any time. Read the informed consent document carefully. Ask questions about any information you don’t understand or find confusing.
Draft Guidance: Informed Consent Information Sheet Guidance for IRBs, Clinical Investigators, and Sponsors
An official website of the United States government
Here’s how you know
Official websites use .gov A .gov website belongs to an official government organization in the United States.
Secure .gov websites use HTTPS A lock ( Lock A locked padlock ) or https:// means you’ve safely connected to the .gov website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.
What is informed consent and when, why, and how must it be obtained.
The HHS regulations at 45 CFR part 46 for the protection of human subjects in research require that an investigator obtain the legally effective informed consent of the subject or the subject’s legally authorized representative, unless (1) the research is exempt under 45 CFR 46.101(b) ; (2) the IRB finds and documents that informed consent can be waived ( 45 CFR 46.116(c) or (d) ); or (3) the IRB finds and documents that the research meets the requirements of the HHS Secretarial waiver under 45 CFR 46.101(i) that permits a waiver of the general requirements for obtaining informed consent in a limited class of research in emergency settings. When informed consent is required, it must be sought prospectively, and documented to the extent required under HHS regulations at 45 CFR 46.117 . [Food and Drug Administration (FDA) regulations at 21 CFR part 50 may also apply if the research involves a clinical investigation regulated by FDA.]
The requirement to obtain the legally effective informed consent of individuals before involving them in research is one of the central protections provided for under the HHS regulations at 45 CFR part 46 . This requirement is founded on the principle of respect for persons, one of the three ethical principles governing human subjects research described in the Belmont Report. The principle of respect for persons requires that individuals be treated as autonomous agents and that the rights and welfare of persons with diminished autonomy be appropriately protected. The Belmont Report states that an autonomous agent is “an individual capable of deliberation about personal goals and of acting under the direction of such deliberation.” Respect for persons requires that prospective research subjects “be given the opportunity to choose what shall or shall not happen to them” and thus necessitates adequate standards for informed consent.
The informed consent process involves three key features: (1) disclosing to potential research subjects information needed to make an informed decision; (2) facilitating the understanding of what has been disclosed; and (3) promoting the voluntariness of the decision about whether or not to participate in the research. Informed consent must be legally effective and prospectively obtained. HHS regulations at 45 CFR 46.116 and 45 CFR 46.117 describe the informed consent requirements.
The informed consent process is the critical communication link between the prospective human subject and an investigator, beginning with the initial approach of an investigator to the potential subject (e.g., through a flyer, brochure, or any advertisement regarding the research study) and continuing until the completion of the research study. For the purposes of the HHS regulations at 45 CFR part 46, “investigators” are individuals who conduct human subjects research projects, including individuals directly involved in seeking the voluntary informed consent of potential subjects. Investigators can include physicians, scientists, nurses, administrative staff, teachers, and students, among others.
The informed consent process should be an active process of sharing information between the investigator and the prospective subject. The exchange of information between the investigator and prospective subjects can occur via one or more of the following modes of communication, among others: face-to-face contact; mail; telephone; video; or fax. Prospective subjects should be provided with ample opportunity to ask questions and seek clarification from the investigator. The prospective subjects should be in a position to freely decide whether to initially enroll in the research, or later, to withdraw or continue participating in the research. The informed consent process should ensure that all critical information about a study is completely disclosed, and that prospective subjects or their legally authorized representatives adequately understand the research so that they can make informed choices.
The procedures used in seeking and obtaining informed consent should be designed to communicate with the subject population in terms that they can understand. Information about a research project must be presented in such a way that enables each person to voluntarily decide whether or not to participate as a research subject. Thus, the information must be conveyed in language understandable to those being asked to participate as subjects in the research ( 45 CFR 46.116 ).
For most research, informed consent is documented using a written document that provides key information regarding the research. The consent form is intended, in part, to provide information for the potential subject’s current and future reference and to document the interaction between the subject and the investigator. However, even if a signed consent form is required, it alone does not constitute an adequate consent process. The informed consent process is an ongoing exchange of information between the investigator and the subject and could include, for example, use of question and answer sessions, community meetings, and videotape presentations. In all circumstances, however, individuals should be provided with an opportunity to have their questions and concerns addressed on an individual basis.
The consent process and its documentation should be revised when deficiencies in its accuracy or completeness are noted, when new information about reasonably foreseeable risks and potential benefits becomes available, or when other additional information becomes known that will improve the consent process. Such revisions must be reviewed and approved by an IRB prior to the revised consent being utilized except when necessary to eliminate apparent immediate hazards to subjects ( 45 CFR 46.103(b)(4) ).
Yes, in certain circumstances it is possible to obtain legally effective informed consent in an urgent or emergency care setting. For a particular research study, the answer depends on (1) the expected medical condition of the prospective subject population; (2) the nature of the research; (3) whether there is sufficient time for the potential subjects or their legally authorized representatives to consider participation; and (4) whether the circumstances for obtaining informed consent appropriately minimize the possibility of coercion or undue influence. The Institutional Review Board (IRB) and investigator(s) would have to consider several variables. For example, what is the likely health and emotional condition of the patient population being considered for the proposed research (e.g., conscious but receiving emergency care, undergoing preparation prior to surgery)? What is the likely ability of this population during the consent process to process information, ask questions, and consider the risk involved? What is the timing of the consent process and is it so close to the receipt of care that the patient might blur the distinction between treatment and research?
Because individuals receiving urgent or emergent medical care frequently may be vulnerable to coercion or undue influence, even if temporarily, additional protections may be required to ensure the subject's consent to participate in research is truly voluntary and sought under circumstances that minimize the possibility of coercion or undue influence ( 45 CFR 46.111(b) , ( 45 CFR 46.116 ). In addition, in some cases, it might be possible to obtain consent from a legally authorized representative (e.g., in the case of decisionally incapacitated individuals). In certain emergency circumstances, the Secretarial waiver of informed consent under 45 CFR 46.101(i) may be applicable. It should be noted that if the research is regulated by FDA, the Secretarial waiver permits the research to be conducted under a comparable provision.
See the Office for Human Research Protections' (OHRP) guidance ; and HHS policy (PDF - 22KB) .
The basic required elements of informed consent can be found in the HHS regulations at 45 CFR 46.116(a) . Also see OHRP Informed Consent Tips .
The regulations require that the following information must be conveyed to each subject:
Additional elements are described at 45 CFR 46.116(b)
When determined to be appropriate by the Institutional Review Board (IRB), subjects must be provided with one or more of the following additional elements of information during the informed consent process (see 45 CFR 46.116(b) ):
It is up to the IRB to determine in a particular instance whether some or all of the above additional elements must be included as part of the informed consent process for a particular study. The IRB should make this determination based on the nature of the research and its knowledge of the local research context. If the IRB determines that additional elements are appropriate to the research study, this additional information should be considered just as essential as the eight basic elements of informed consent described in the HHS regulations at 45 CFR 46.116(a) .
Furthermore, an IRB may require that additional information beyond the basic and additional elements be given to subjects during the informed consent process, when in the IRB’s judgment the additional information would meaningfully add to the protection of the rights and welfare of the subjects 45 CFR 46.109(b) .
Terms such as “passive” or “implied” consent are not referenced in the HHS regulations. However, OHRP is aware that these terms are sometimes used by investigators or IRBs to describe a process in which consent or parental permission requirements have been altered or waived, or for which the requirement to document consent or parental permission has been waived.
HHS regulations at 45 CFR 46.116 state that no investigator may involve a human being as a subject unless the investigator has obtained the legally effective informed consent of the subject or the subject’s legally authorized representative. However, under conditions specified in the regulations at 45 CFR 46.116(c) or (d) an IRB may approve a consent procedure that does not include, or that alters some or all of the elements of informed consent set forth in 45 CFR 46.116 . In some cases, an IRB also can waive the requirement to obtain consent ( 45 CFR 46.116(c) and (d) ). In addition, under conditions specified in the regulations at 45 CFR 46.117 , an IRB may also waive the requirement for documentation of informed consent. (Note that the regulations at 45 CFR 46.408(c) also permit an IRB to waive parental permission.)
For example, a researcher conducting a survey (that does not qualify for an exemption under 45 CFR 46.101(b) mails a survey questionnaire to a random sample of adults. The survey materials clearly state that by responding to the questions and mailing the survey back, the recipients have agreed to participate in the research. However, the materials accompanying the questionnaire do not include all of the elements of consent listed at 45 CFR 46.116(a) and do not require that the subject sign a consent form. If the IRB has approved this alteration of the consent process and has waived the need for documentation of consent, then such procedures are permissible under the regulations. By sending back a completed survey the recipient has implied that he or she consents to participate but has not signed an informed consent document. Although some might call this “implied informed consent,” OHRP would consider this to be a permissible informed consent process if the IRB has approved the informed consent alteration and waived the requirement for documentation of informed consent.
The term “passive consent” is sometimes used in research with children to describe situations in which the investigator can assume that a parent is permitting a child to participate. For example, researchers collecting survey and behavioral data from children at school provide parents with information regarding the study by mail and ask the parent(s) to return a form if they do not want their child to participate. Sometimes this practice is referred to as an opt out procedure, which is not consistent with the regulatory requirement for seeking and obtaining parental permission. If the IRB determines that the conditions for waiver of parental permission can be met, then the IRB could waive the requirement for parental permission under 45 CFR 46.408(c) or 45 CFR 46.116(c) or (d) . Even though not required by the regulations, an IRB may require that parents be given the opportunity to refuse permission even when the IRB has waived the regulatory requirement to obtain parental permission.
The HHS regulations state that “An investigator shall seek such consent only under circumstances that provide the prospective subject or the representative sufficient opportunity to consider whether or not to participate and that minimize the possibility of coercion or undue influence” ( 45 CFR 46.116 ). This requirement applies to all nonexempt human subjects research not eligible for a waiver of the consent requirements.
Coercion occurs when an overt or implicit threat of harm is intentionally presented by one person to another in order to obtain compliance. For example, an investigator might tell a prospective subject that he or she will lose access to needed health services if he or she does not participate in the research.
Undue influence , by contrast, often occurs through an offer of an excessive or inappropriate reward or other overture in order to obtain compliance. For example, an investigator might promise psychology students extra credit if they participate in the research. If that is the only way a student can earn extra credit, then the investigator is unduly influencing potential subjects. If, however, she offers comparable non-research alternatives for earning extra credit, the possibility of undue influence is minimized.
In addition to undue influence that can arise with the offering of rewards, undue influence also can be subtle. For example, patients might feel obligated to participate in research if their physician is also the investigator, or students might feel pressure to participate in research if everyone else in the class is doing so. Because influence is contextual, and undue influence is likely to depend on an individual’s situation, it is often difficult for IRBs to draw a bright line delimiting undue influence. It is up to the IRB to use its discretion in determining which circumstances give rise to undue influence. For example, an IRB might consider whether the informed consent process will take place at an appropriate time and in an appropriate setting, and whether the prospective subject may feel pressured into acting quickly or be discouraged from seeking advice from others.
Because of their relative nature and lack of clear-cut standards on the boundaries of inappropriate and appropriate forms of influence, investigators and IRBs must be vigilant about minimizing the possibility for coercion and undue influence. Reasonable assessments can be made to minimize the likelihood of undue influence or coercion occurring. For example, IRBs may restrict levels of financial or nonfinancial incentives for participation and should carefully review the information to be disclosed to potential subjects to ensure that the incentives and how they will be provided are clearly described. Known benefits should be stated accurately but not exaggerated, and potential or uncertain benefits should be stated as such, with clear language indicating how much is known about the uncertainty or likelihood of these potential benefits.
The regulatory requirements for IRB review and approval also specify the need for the IRB -- in order to approve research covered by the HHS regulations -- to ensure that “When some or all of the subjects are likely to be vulnerable to coercion or undue influence, such as children , prisoners , pregnant women , mentally disabled persons, or economically or educationally disadvantaged persons, additional safeguards have been included in the study to protect the rights and welfare of these subjects” ( 45 CFR 46.111(b) ). Thus, inducements that would ordinarily be acceptable in some populations may become undue influences for these vulnerable subject groups.
The HHS regulations require that “An investigator shall seek such consent only under circumstances that provide the prospective subject or the representative sufficient opportunity to consider whether or not to participate and that minimize the possibility of coercion or undue influence” ( 45 CFR 46.116 ).
Paying research subjects in exchange for their participation is a common and, in general, acceptable practice. However, difficult questions must be addressed by the IRB. For example, how much money should research subjects receive, and for what should subjects receive payment -- their time, inconvenience, discomfort, or some other consideration -- IRBs must be sensitive to whether any aspect of the proposed remuneration will be an undue influence, thus interfering with the potential subjects’ ability to give voluntary informed consent.
Remuneration for participation in research should be just and fair. However, the specifics of each protocol will influence how those determinations are made. Both researchers and IRBs need to be familiar with the study population and the context of the research in order to make reasonable judgments about how compensation might affect participation. Wherever the remuneration is set, it will influence the decisions of some more than others. In particular, it will be more important to those for whom it will make a significant financial difference. Thus, IRBs should be cautious that payments are not so high that they create an “undue influence” or offer undue inducement that could compromise a prospective subject’s examination and evaluation of the risks or affect the voluntariness of his or her choices.
Information submitted to IRBs should indicate and justify proposed levels and purposes of remuneration, which also should be clearly stated in the accompanying consent forms.
Some institutions have adopted policies regarding the recruitment and payment of volunteers. IRBs and investigators should ensure that the consent process includes a detailed account of the terms of payment, including a description of the conditions under which a subject would receive partial or no payment (e.g., what will happen if he or she withdraws part way through the research or the investigator removes a subject from the study for medical or noncompliance reasons).
Finally, in studies of considerable duration or that involve multiple interactions or interventions, OHRP recommends that payment be prorated for the time of participation in the study rather than delayed until study completion, because the latter could unduly influence a subject’s decision to exercise his or her right to withdraw at any time. For example, if the study is conducted over a period of 6 months, there might be a monthly or bi-monthly payment. Or, if the study involves 12 sessions, there might be payment after every two sessions.
The above principles would apply to remuneration offered to parents whose children are prospective subjects.
[ Note: The previous version of the response to this FAQ included the following sentences. “In no case should remuneration be viewed as a way of offsetting risks; that is, it should not be considered a benefit to be weighed against study risks. The level of remuneration should not be so high as to cause a prospective subject to accept risks that he or she would not accept in the absence of the remuneration.” The first sentence has been struck because this FAQ focuses on potential undue influence in the consent process (45 CFR 46.116) rather than on IRB considerations under 45 CFR 46.111. However, OHRP continues to assert that IRBs should not consider remuneration as a way of offsetting risks. The second sentence has been deleted to clarify that remuneration to subjects may include compensation for risks associated with their participation in research and that compensation may be an acceptable motive for agreeing to participate in research. In addition, the previous version contained the following sentence, which has been struck because it is focused on IRB considerations under 45 CFR 46. 111 rather than informed consent, and was misplaced in this FAQ: “IRBs may need to request of the investigator some plan for monitoring subject recruitment to ensure that such inducements do not result in inequitable subject recruitment (e.g., recruiting only economically disadvantaged individuals).” ]
Yes, in certain circumstances. Non-monetary incentives (e.g., extra credit for students, access to services or programs) also can create undue influence on a potential subject’s decision about research participation. Informed consent always must be voluntary ( 45 CFR 46.116 ).
IRBs should ensure that non-financial incentives are not so great as to diminish the voluntariness of consent or cloud someone’s appreciation of risks or potential benefits that might be gained from participating in a study ( 45 CFR 46.116 ). Moreover, it must be clear that choosing to not participate will not adversely affect an individual’s relationship with the institution or its staff or the provision of services in any way (e.g., loss of credits or access to programs) ( 45 CFR 46.116(a)(8) ).
Overt coercion (e.g., threatening loss of services or access to programs to which the potential subjects are otherwise entitled) is never appropriate. However, it might be permissible to provide incentives to participate that do not constitute undue influence. Using enrollment incentives to recruit subjects may be ethically permissible as long as the IRB has determined that, although they may be a factor in a subject’s decision to participate, they have not served to unduly influence the subject to participate. To make this determination, IRBs should know who the subject population will be, what incentives are being offered, and the conditions under which the offer will be made.
The regulations require that the investigator seek consent only under circumstances that minimize the possibility of coercion or undue influence ( 45 CFR 46.116 ). The Office for Human Research Protections (OHRP) recommends that institutions have policies in place that clarify for students and faculty that any participation of students in research must be voluntary. Reasonable levels of extra credit or rewards may be offered for participating in research. If extra credit or rewards are offered for participation, students must be provided with and informed of non-research alternatives involving comparable time and effort to obtain the extra credit in order for the possibility of undue influence to be minimized. However, if participation in research is a course requirement, students must be informed of non-research alternatives involving comparable time and effort to fulfill those requirements in order for the possibility of undue influence to be minimized. Moreover, students must not be penalized for refusing to participate in research ( 45 CFR 46.116(a)(8) ).
In addition, some research institutions use a so-called “student subject pool” to identify students who might be willing to participate in research, even when the exact nature of the research to be conducted has not yet been determined. Extra credits or other rewards are often offered as an incentive to encourage participation. Students who sign up for such pools have not legally consented to participate in a research study since they have not been provided with sufficient information concerning the exact study in which they would participate. Thus, signing up to be in a subject pool is only a first and preliminary step by which individuals can indicate their willingness to be considered for research participation. The student must also provide informed consent, unless the consent requirement is waived by an IRB once he or she is being considered for a specific study ( 45 CFR 46.116 ). Furthermore, individuals in the pool must be free to decline participation in any available research projects without penalty ( 45 CFR 46.116(a)(8) ).
The issues involving employees as research subjects are essentially identical to those involving students as research subjects: that is, investigators and IRBs must be cautious about the potential for coercion or undue influence and the need to protect confidentiality.
Employee participation raises questions about the ability of employees to exercise free choice, for example, because of the possibility that a decision to participate could affect performance evaluations or job advancement, even if it is only the employee’s perception that this is the case. In the case of coercion, refusal to participate might result in a loss of benefits (e.g., salary increases, time off). In the case of undue influence, a decision to participate could result in a job promotion. Employees are likely to view their employers as authority figures to whom they must show deference, which could undermine the freedom of their choice.
Yes, in some circumstances. The HHS regulations require that an investigator obtain legally effective informed consent from subjects or a legally authorized representative before the subjects may be involved in research ( 45 CFR 46.116 ), unless this requirement has been waived by an IRB . Likewise, for research involving children, permission of the potential subjects' parents or guardians must be obtained ( 45 CFR46.408(c) ), unless an IRB has waived this requirement . Ensuring an adequate consent or parental permission process may require repeating or supplementing the initial consent procedure. The regulations also stipulate that “An investigator shall seek such consent only under circumstances that provide the prospective subject or the representative sufficient opportunity to consider whether or not to participate and that minimizes the possibility of coercion or undue influence” ( 45 CFR 46.116 ). This requirement also might necessitate repeating or supplementing the initial consent procedure.
Informed consent and parental permission should be viewed as an ongoing process. The regulations do not explicitly describe all of the circumstances that might require repeating or supplementing the informed consent process. However, they do require that potential subjects be provided, when appropriate, with a “statement that significant new findings developed during the course of the research which may relate to the subject’s willingness to continue participation will be provided to the subject” ( 45 CFR 46.116(b)(5) ). Thus, to ensure that consent remains legally effective -- for example, if the protocol design or risks have changed, or if a substantial period of time has elapsed between the time consent was obtained and the study begins -- it might be necessary to ensure that subjects still want to participate in the research. For example, the prospective subject may no longer be interested in participating, may no longer meet the eligibility criteria, may no longer find the risks acceptable, or may no longer have the time to complete all study-related activities.
The IRB must review and approve any changes in the approved consent procedure, including alterations of the content, as described in the elements listed at 45 CFR 46.116 , or in its timing, and may consider whether there is a need to reiterate the process ( 45 CFR 46.103(b)(4) ). The IRB should take into account whether the changes could potentially affect a subject’s understanding of the nature of the study or potentially affect a subject’s willingness to participate. If so, such changes need to be made in the informed consent document. Even without significant changes to a protocol or informed consent document, periodic reiteration or affirmation of consent is often a good idea, especially if the study takes place over a long period of time or is particularly complex. Minor changes, such as correcting nonsubstantive typographical errors in the consent document, would not generally rise to a level requiring repeating the consent process.
The HHS regulations at 45 CFR part 46 do not specify how far in advance of study entry a subject can provide consent. The amount of time required by a subject to make a decision would presumably depend on the nature of the study, taking into account, among other factors, the degree of risk, potential benefits, alternatives, and desire to consult with family members or others. However, if a prolonged period of time elapses from the date of consent to the date of entry into the study even if there have been no changes in the study design or no new significant findings affecting the study it might be prudent to review the information contained in the consent form with the subject prior to initiating any research procedures with the subject.
Yes, under certain circumstances. Although the HHS regulations do not specifically reference this type of activity, sometimes referred to as “preparatory to research,” such an activity must be reviewed and approved by an IRB in accordance with HHS regulations at 45 CFR 46.109(a) when:
In general, informed consent of the subjects, or parental permission for children involved in research, must be sought and documented in accordance with, and to the extent required by, HHS regulations at 45 CFR 46.116 and 45 CFR 46.117 respectively.
However, an IRB may approve a consent or parental permission procedure that does not include, or that alters, some or all of the elements of informed consent, or may waive the requirements to obtain informed consent ( 45 CFR 46.116(c) or (d) ). In order to permit investigators to obtain and record identifiable private information for the purposes of identifying potential subjects, OHRP expects that IRBs routinely will waive the requirement for informed consent for such activities. In assessing the level of risk to determine whether a waiver of informed consent or parental permission is permissible for the identification of potential subjects, the IRB need only consider the risk of investigators accessing the subjects’ identifiable private information, not the risks of the research in toto.
The procedures used in obtaining informed consent and parental permission should be designed to inform the subject population or the parents of the subject population about the research in terms that they can understand. Therefore, informed consent and parental permission language and its documentation in the accompanying forms (especially explanation of the study’s purpose, duration, experimental procedures, alternatives, risks, and benefits) should be provided in language that is understandable and culturally sensitive to those being asked to participate or provide permission for their child’s participation.
If the prospective subjects include, for example, persons whose primary language is not English, or populations with low literacy levels, the IRB should take special care to ensure that both oral presentations and consent or permission forms are comprehensible to all subjects or the parents of subjects who are children. Subjects who do not speak English should be presented with a consent or permission document written in a language understandable to them. OHRP strongly encourages the use of such a document whenever possible. (See OHRP guidance on this topic at http://www.hhs.gov/ohrp/regulations-and-policy/guidance/obtaining-and-documenting-infomed-consent-non-english-speakers/index.html ; for information about requirements for child assent, see FAQs regarding research with children .)
In general, ordinary language should replace technical terms (e.g., upper extremities are better referred to as arms, venipuncture as taking blood from your arm with a needle, and so forth).
Some IRBs find that their lay members (e.g., community or non-scientist members) are particularly helpful in suggesting necessary modifications to language. Others ask members of the proposed subject population (e.g., clinic patients) to review consent or permission forms and indicate which parts they do not understand.
Yes, under certain circumstances. First, the investigator and the IRB need to be aware of relevant laws pertaining to electronic signatures in the jurisdiction where the research is going to be conducted.
Unless the IRB waives the requirement for the investigator to obtain a signed consent or permission form based on the HHS regulations at 45 CFR 46.117(c) , a written consent or permission form, which may be an electronic version, must be given to and signed by the subjects or the subjects' legally authorized representatives or the parents of subjects who are children. Some form of the consent document must be made available to the subjects or the parents of subjects who are children in a format they can retain. OHRP would allow electronic signature of the document if such signatures are legally valid within the jurisdiction where the research is to be conducted.
OHRP does not mandate a specific method of electronic signature. Rather, OHRP permits IRBs to adopt such technologies for use as long as the IRB has considered applicable issues such as how the electronic signature is being created, if the signature can be shown to be legitimate, and if the consent or permission document can be produced in hard copy for review by the potential subject. One method of allowable electronic signatures in some jurisdictions is the use of a secure system for electronic or digital signature that provides an encrypted identifiable “signature.” If properly obtained, an electronic signature can be considered an “original” for the purposes of recordkeeping.
Yes, if it is more convenient for the subjects or parents of children who are subjects to fax a signed copy of the consent or permission form to the investigator, the research subjects or parents may fax the signed form. The subjects or parents need not provide the investigator with the original signed consent or parental permission documents.
When a written consent or parental permission form is used that embodies some or all of the elements of informed consent required by the regulations at 45 CFR 46.116 , the regulations only require that the informed consent or parental permission document be signed by the subjects or the subjects' legally authorized representatives or by the parents of children who are subjects ( 45 CFR 46.117(a) ) and 45 CFR 46.408(d) ). Only in situations where a short form is used, stating that the elements of informed consent required by 45 CFR 46.116 have been presented orally to the subject or the subject’s legally authorized representative or to the parent(s) of a child who is a subject, are there additional requirements for signatures ( 45 CFR 46.117(b)(2) ).
For the consent or parental permission process using the short form, the regulations state that there must be a witness to the oral presentation, who then signs both the short form and a copy of the IRB-approved written summary of what is to be said to the subject or the subject's legally authorized representative or to the parent(s) of a child who is a subject. The subject or the subject’s legally authorized representative or the parent(s) must sign the short form, and the person actually obtaining the consent must sign the copy of the summary ( 45 CFR 46.117(b)(2) ). Thus, three types of persons are involved in this specific consent process -- the subject or legally authorized representative or parent(s) of a child who is a subject, the person obtaining consent, and the witness.
Although the HHS regulations at 45 CFR 46.117 do not require the consent form to be dated at the time it is signed, OHRP recommends that it be dated so that the IRB and others can document that informed consent was obtained prior to a subject’s participation in the research.
Legally authorized representative (LAR) means an individual or judicial or other body authorized under applicable law to consent on behalf of a prospective subject to the subject’s participation in the procedure(s) involved in the research ( 45 CFR 46.102(c) ). The regulations state that “no investigator may involve a human being as a subject in research covered by this policy unless the investigator has obtained the legally effective informed consent of the subject or the subject’s legally authorized representative” ( 45 CFR 46.116 ). The issue as to who can be an LAR is determined by the laws of the jurisdiction in which the research is conducted (e.g., local or state law). Some states have statutes, regulations, or common law that specifically address consent by someone other than the subject for participation in research. Most states have no law specifically addressing the issue of consent in the research context. In these states, law that addresses who is authorized to give consent on behalf of another person to specific medical procedures or generally to medical treatment may be relevant if the research involves those medical procedures or medical treatment.
When the laws of the jurisdiction in which the research is being conducted provide a reasonable basis for authorizing an individual to consent on behalf of a prospective subject to their participation in the research procedure(s), OHRP would consider such an individual to be an LAR as defined by HHS regulations at 45 CFR 46.102(c) . IRBs may wish to consult with legal counsel when deciding who can serve as an LAR for subjects of proposed research.
In answering this question, the HHS regulations at 45 CFR part 46 should be consulted in addition to the laws of the jurisdiction in which the research is conducted. As a general matter, if an adult lacks capacity to consent, for example, as a result of trauma, mental retardation, some forms of mental illness, or dementia - whether temporary, progressive, or permanent - only a legally authorized representative for that adult can give consent for participation in the research, unless the requirement to obtain informed consent is waived by the IRB in accordance with the requirements at 45 CFR 46.116(c)(d) , or in accordance with the provisions for emergency waiver, which are permitted under the authority of the HHS Secretary at 45 CFR 46.101(i) .
( See the Federal Register notice of this waiver .) Should the subject regain or develop the capacity to consent, then his or her consent must be obtained for any further research, as the consent of the legally authorized representative is no longer valid.
The HHS regulations are silent on the consent procedures specific to subjects with impaired decision-making capacity, for example, as a result of trauma, mental retardation, some forms of mental illness, or dementia, whether temporary, progressive, or permanent. The regulations do require that the IRB ensure that “additional safeguards have been included in the study to protect the rights and welfare” of all subjects that are “likely to be vulnerable to coercion or undue influence.” The regulations include “mentally disabled persons” in this category ( 45 CFR 46.111(b) ).
In research involving adult subjects with mental illnesses or cognitive impairments, the IRB and investigator(s) must be knowledgeable about the condition and any level of impairment that is likely to be present in the subject population. The regulations do speak to the fact that the IRB must possess “the professional competence necessary to review specific research activities” ( 45 CFR 46.107(a) ). This is achieved either by having members with the appropriate experience and expertise or inviting consultants with competence in the special area to assist in the review of issues that require expertise beyond or in addition to that available on the IRB ( 45 CFR 46.107(a) and (f) ). Ensuring such expertise on the IRB improves its ability to make determinations about subject recruitment, enrollment, and informed consent requirements that best match the needs of the subjects.
In some research, such as longitudinal studies involving progressive disorders or aging populations, enrolled subjects may be competent to consent on their own behalf at the outset, yet may experience effects of progressive or intermittent disorders that lead to decisional impairment during the course of the study. In these situations IRBs and investigators should consider the need to discuss with the prospective subjects whether they should designate someone to serve as a legally authorized representative at the outset of the study, consistent with all applicable laws. Even if a subject has consented on his or her own accord, a designated representative would be ready to step in as the legally authorized representative if the subject’s ability to assess his or her own needs and interests becomes compromised during the study.
The IRB must determine, to the extent required by 45 CFR 46.116 , that adequate provisions are made for soliciting the assent of the children -- when in the judgment of the IRB the children are capable of providing assent -- as well as the permission of the parents ( 45 CFR 46.408 ). Permission means the agreement of parent(s) or guardian to the participation of their child or ward in research ( 45 CFR 46.402(c) ).
By regulatory definition, children are “persons who have not attained the legal age for consent to treatments or procedures involved in the research, under the applicable law of the jurisdiction in which the research will be conducted” ( 45 CFR 46.402(a) ). In the United States the legal age of adulthood is a matter of state and local law. This means that who is legally considered a child may vary from state to state; in a large majority of states 18 years of age is the legal age of adulthood, but this is not true in every state, locality, or territory. State law also may address specific circumstances in which a person younger than the age of adulthood is legally authorized to consent to medical procedures: for example, some states allow children younger than the legal age of adulthood to consent to the provision of contraceptive services. Certain states provide a mechanism for the emancipation of minors, through which a child younger than the legal age of adulthood may gain certain civil rights, which might include the legal ability to consent to research participation.
The definition of children also takes into account the particular interventions or interactions involved in the proposed research (e.g., surveys, blood tests). For example, in some places individuals who are 16 years of age may legally consent to certain clinical interventions or interactions. If the involvement of human subjects in a proposed research activity consists of these interventions or interactions, then those individuals may be considered as adults for that purpose. If a proposed activity includes an intervention or interaction for which the subject has not yet reached the legal age of consent, however, that person must be considered a child.
Under 45 CFR 408(b) the IRB may find that the permission of one parent is sufficient for research to be conducted under 45 CFR 46.404 or 45 CFR 46.405 . Where research is conducted under 45 CFR 46.406 or 45 CFR 46.407 , permission must be obtained from both parents unless one parent is deceased, unknown, incompetent, or not reasonably available, or when only one parent has legal responsibility for the care and custody of the child.
Although the regulations state that children are unable to provide legally effective informed consent to participate in research, some might be able to give their assent. Assent means a child’s affirmative agreement to participate in research. Mere failure to object should not, absent affirmative agreement, be construed as assent ( 45 CFR 46.402(b) ).
If the IRB determines that the capability of some or all of the children is so limited that they cannot reasonably be consulted regarding assent, or that the intervention or procedure involved in the research holds out a prospect of direct benefit that is important to the health or well-being of the children, and is available only in the context of the research, the assent of the children is not a necessary condition for proceeding with the research. Even where the IRB determines that the subjects are capable of assenting, the IRB may still waive the assent requirement under certain circumstances in accord with 45 CFR 46.116 and 45 CFR 46.408(a) .
Waiver or alteration of the requirements for obtaining informed consent from adult subjects can occur under any of the following three provisions:
For research involving children, an IRB may waive the requirements for obtaining parental or guardian permission under any of the following four provisions:
The term guardian means “an individual who is authorized under applicable State or local law to consent on behalf of a child to general medical care” ( 45 CFR 46.402(e) ) The role of a guardian in the context of research involving a child who is a ward is to provide permission, in lieu of a child’s biological or adoptive parents, for the ward to participate in the research ( 45 CFR 46.402(c) ). For a more extensive discussion see FAQs on Research with Children .
The Office for Human Research Protections (OHRP) notes that informed consent should be viewed as an ongoing process throughout the duration of a research project. When a child who was enrolled in research with parental or guardian permission subsequently reaches the legal age of consent to the procedures involved in ongoing research, the subject’s participation in the research is no longer regulated by the requirements of 45 CFR part 46.408 regarding parental or guardian permission and subject assent.
Unless the Institutional Review Board (IRB) determines that the requirements for obtaining informed consent can be waived, the investigators should seek and obtain the legally effective informed consent, as described in 45 CFR 46.116 , for the now-adult subject for any ongoing interactions or interventions with the subjects. This is because the prior parental permission and child assent are not equivalent to legally effective informed consent for the now-adult subject. However, the IRB could approve a waiver of informed consent under 45 CFR 46.116(d) , if the IRB finds and documents that the required conditions are met.
Similarly, if the research does not involve any ongoing interactions or interventions with the subjects, but continues to meet the regulatory definition of “human subjects research” (for example, it involves the continued analysis of specimens or data for which the subject’s identity is readily identifiable to the investigator(s)), then it would be necessary for the investigator(s) to seek and obtain the legally effective informed consent of the now-adult subjects. The IRB may consider, if appropriate, a waiver under 45 CFR 46.116(d) of the requirements for obtaining informed consent in order for the subjects to continue their participation in the research.
The HHS regulations allow the IRB to waive the requirement for obtaining informed consent or parental permission or to approve a consent procedure that leaves out or alters some or all of the elements of informed consent otherwise required under 45 CFR 46.116(a) and (b) .
Waiving the requirement for obtaining informed consent or parental permission means that the IRB has determined that investigators need not obtain the subjects’ informed consent to participate in research. For example, some research about natural behavior may require that subjects be unaware that the research is taking place. Such research can only be approved by the IRB if the research meets the criteria for a waiver of informed consent under HHS regulations and for approving research according to 45 CFR 46.111 .
An IRB may approve research for which some or all of the elements of informed consent at 45 CFR 46.116 (a) and (b) have been altered, or for which some elements have been left out. For example, some research designs require that subjects be left unaware of the particular purpose of the research, because the subjects’ responses might be biased if they know in advance what the investigators are seeking. Such research designs do not preclude offering potential subjects some information about the research and giving them the opportunity to decide whether to participate. The IRB may approve such research in which investigators will leave out or alter elements of informed consent, so long as the research meets the criteria for approving research in 45 CFR 46.111 , and the research meets the criteria specified in the HHS regulations for leaving out or altering those elements.
The conditions under which an IRB may waive the requirement for obtaining informed consent or parental permission or may approve a consent procedure that leaves out or alters some or all of the elements of informed consent derive from four sources in the HHS regulations.
Under 45 CFR 46.116(c) , an IRB may waive the requirement for obtaining informed consent or parental permission or approve a consent or parental permission procedure that leaves out or alters some or all of the elements of informed consent, provided that the IRB finds and documents that the following two criteria are satisfied:
the research or demonstration project is to be conducted by or subject to the approval of state or local government officials and is designed to study, evaluate, or otherwise examine:
Note that this criterion means that only public benefit or service program research activities that are under state or local authority meet this criterion; similar research conducted under federal authority would not qualify here and is treated elsewhere in the regulations. Research conducted by or subject to the approval of only a private entity also would not qualify.
This criterion means that the practical circumstances of the research are such that the research is not feasible if the informed consent of the subjects must be obtained. For example, a study of identifiable private information about program benefit recipients using 20-year-old records might meet this criterion, if current contact information for those recipients is not available.
Under 45 CFR 46.116(d) the IRB may waive the requirement for obtaining informed consent or approve a consent procedure that leaves out or alters some or all of the elements of informed consent, provided that the IRB finds and documents that all of the following four criteria are met:
In 1996, the HHS Secretary announced, under 45 CFR 46.101(i) , a waiver of the applicability of the regulatory requirement for obtaining and documenting informed consent for a strictly limited class of research, that is, research that may be carried out in human subjects who are in need of emergency therapy and for whom, because of the subjects’ medical condition and the unavailability of legally authorized representatives of the subjects, no legally effective informed consent can be obtained. This waiver applies to research involving adults or children, but does not apply to research involving pregnant women, human fetuses, neonates of uncertain viability, and nonviable neonates, or prisoners.
For more detailed information, see OHRP’s guidance on Emergency Research Consent Waiver . It should be noted that FDA also has a comparable provision for a waiver of informed consent for emergency research at 21 CFR 50.24 .
When an Institutional Review Board (IRB) has not waived the requirement for seeking prospective informed consent of the subjects or the parental permission of children who are subjects, under the HHS regulations at 45 CFR 46.117(c) , it may waive the requirement for the investigator to obtain a signed consent form for some or all subjects if it finds either:
Some subjects might refuse a copy of the consent form once signed out of concern that their possession of the form could compromise their privacy. This is fully consistent with the idea behind one of the bases for a waiver of the requirements for documentation of informed consent - that harm would result to the subject if his/her identity were compromised by the documentation itself. The investigator may document that the subject refused a copy of the informed consent document and still include the subject in the study.
In cases in which the documentation requirement is waived, the IRB may require the investigator to provide subjects or the parents of children who are subjects with a written statement regarding the research.
Yes, under certain circumstances. An IRB may waive the requirements for obtaining parental or guardian permission if either of the following two conditions is met:
The choice of an appropriate substitute mechanism (for example, appointing a child advocate or an assent monitor) for protecting children participating in research would depend on the nature and purpose of the activities described in the protocol, the risk and anticipated benefit to the research subjects, and the child’s age, maturity, status, and condition ( 45 CFR 46.408(c) ).
Note that an IRB may waive the requirement for obtaining parental or guardian permission under 45 CFR 46.408(c) even if the research involves more than minimal risk to the child subjects.
No, the IRB is responsible for deciding whether child assent is required in proposed research activities. Assent means a child’s affirmative agreement to participate in research. Mere failure to object should not, absent affirmative agreement, be construed as assent ( 45 CFR 46.402(b) ). Child assent is required, except in the following three circumstances described at 45 CFR 46.408(a) :
The HHS regulations do not require documentation of assent. The IRB has the discretion to determine the appropriate manner, if any, of documenting child assent. Based on such considerations as the child’s age, maturity, and degree of literacy, the IRB should decide what form of documentation, if any, is most appropriate. If adolescents are involved in research where a consent form would have been used if the subjects were adults, it would generally be appropriate to use a similar form to document an adolescent’s assent.
If young children are involved who are as yet unable to read, documentation should take a form that is appropriate for the purpose of recording that assent took place. The IRB may also decide that documentation of assent is not warranted.
Informed consent is legally effective if it is both obtained from the subject or the subject’s legally authorized representative and documented in a manner that is consistent with the HHS protection of human subjects regulations and with applicable laws of the jurisdiction in which the research is conducted. In general terms, the regulations stipulate that an investigator should seek consent only under circumstances that provide the prospective subject or the legally authorized representative sufficient opportunity to consider whether to participate and that minimize the possibility of coercion or undue influence. The information provided should be in language that is understandable to the subject or the representative. No informed consent, whether oral or written, may include any exculpatory language .
It is important to note that the informed consent requirements in the regulations are not intended to preempt any applicable federal, state, or local laws that require additional information to be disclosed for consent to be legally effective ( 45 CFR 46.116(e) ).
Information and guidance for researchers, what is informed consent.
Informed consent is one of the founding principles of research ethics. Its intent is that human participants can enter research freely (voluntarily) with full information about what it means for them to take part, and that they give consent before they enter the research.
Consent should be obtained before the participant enters the research (prospectively), and there must be no undue influence on participants to consent. The minimum requirements for consent to be informed are that the participant understands what the research is and what they are consenting to.
There are two distinct stages to a standard consent process for competent adults:
Researchers should ensure that they comply with the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) during and after the consent process, especially if they will be collecting 'special category' (ie sensitive) data or personal data in the course of their research (also refer to the advice on consent in research involving children ). See also the guidance on data protection and research and the data protection checklist for use when preparing an application for ethical review.
Where your research includes filming or photography, you should refer to specific guidance in the Photography and GDPR toolkit .
Which process to use depends on the research project (its context, design and participants), though an oral process is usually only appropriate where a written process is not feasible. Any consent process must be understandable to the participants concerned. Please see the sections below to find out about different processes which may be used depending on the context, as well as informed consent templates for each process.
A written process is used where:
Though opinions differ about the legal force of signed consent forms, they provide extra proof that the terms of consent have been understood. This can be especially important when seeking consent for copyright over data, or for future uses of data. Also, future funders or regulators may want written proof of the terms of original consent.
For literate participants who are not put off by written information, a written process is often a straightforward way of communicating the 'research contract'.
Between the provision of information and obtaining consent, the participant should be given a reasonable amount of time to consider whether to consent and to ask questions, though the time given depends on the project design, the context of the research and the participants.
The written consent templates below can be adapted to suit your study.
An oral consent process is where researcher and participant have a conversation to give information and obtain consent. There is no paper form to sign. It is normally used:
It may also be more appropriate when interviewing elite participants as part of the research.
For all other research, how you arrange the oral process depends on how you will encounter your participants (for example email, phone, an on-the-street-meeting by chance). Between the information-giving and consent stage the participant should be given a reasonable amount of time to consider whether to consent, though this depends on the project design, the type of participants and the context of the research.
When obtaining oral consent, please ensure you are recording the consent process either using a recording device (for example audio recorder if you are conducting an interview that needs to be recorded) or, if participants do not agree to audio recording or if using or keeping audio records is unsafe, by using a researcher record of oral consent template or completing a written consent form on their behalf.
The oral consent templates below can be adapted to suit your study, but careful consideration is required to ensure that these are appropriate for the research and the participants.
Written informed consent process (including online surveys).
Description | File download |
---|---|
Any relevant advertising or recruiting material (poster, email text, social media advert) | |
Template information sheet | |
Template written consent form | |
Template information sheet for online research For online tasks only, where there is no face-to-face contact with human participants | |
Template information sheet for research involving children |
|
Template assent form for research involving children |
|
Participant information sheet for CUREC 3 studies | |
Consent form for CUREC 3 studies | |
Template email consent form – for low-risk research in the social sciences and humanities that does not involve face-to-face contact with participants |
Description | File download |
---|---|
Any relevant advertising or recruiting material (poster, email text, social media advert) | |
Oral script | |
Written information sheet | |
Assent template for studies recruiting children | |
Alongside your script, the use of an oral consent record form is recommended. This is a form only you fill in, and helps you keep track of any specific conditions attached to an oral consent |
Description | File download | |
---|---|---|
This legal contribution template should be signed by research participants and Oxford researchers if the latter wish to upload participants’ photographs, videos, films, podcasts, audio recordings, etc to University of Oxford archives. This should be completed in addition to the above informed consent templates | ||
This legal confidentiality agreement template can be adapted for research assistants/ interpreters/ translators/ transcribers/ local fieldworkers who are non-University employees | ||
This legal confidentiality agreement template can be adapted for research assistants/ interpreters/ translators/ transcribers/ local fieldworkers who are University employees |
Researchers should always aim to inform people fully and obtain appropriate consent. However, in some cases the research may be straightforward enough that a separate, deliberate process for obtaining consent is not needed. In these cases participants, by their actions, imply consent. This is seen most often in research:
Please note: consent cannot be inferred from inaction (eg failure to move away from a camera).
If your research employs deception, you will not be able to inform participants fully about your project’s true aims. In this case please check if you can fully apply the CUREC approved procedure on research involving the deception of participants . If the deception raises ethical concerns such that the application is not covered by this procedure please complete a CUREC 2 application form.
Some research settings evolve very rapidly (for example in conflict studies). Similarly, some research participants may only be revealed in time-poor or emergency settings (eg heart attack patients). This infringes on the standard information-giving stage of research. The vulnerability of participants in those settings may justify an expedited or fully waived consent process. Again it is important to describe the research setting clearly. You may need to complete a CUREC 2 application to the relevant committee in these cases: please check with your DREC or your IDREC .
Last updated Thursday 2 December 2021
IMAGES
VIDEO
COMMENTS
se this template if your research is NOT. derally-sponsore. A. D participants are adults.Avoid Common Problems with Consent Forms. Read these tips!1. ustomize this template to reflect the specifics of your study and participan. population.Text in [brackets] represents study-specific information that must be added.A ba.
A collection of informed consent, assent, and debriefing templates that can be used for your human participant research study. General Consent Form Templates Social and Behavioral Research Projects (last updated 03/16/2023)
Download a free template for a research informed consent form, which is used to inform and protect human participants in a study. Learn how to fill out the form with the title, purpose, procedures, risks, benefits, compensation, and contact information.
Consent Addendum This is a consent addendum to allow already enrolled participants to agree to additional study procedures not disclosed in the initial consent form. This form supplements the consent and HIPAA authorization the subject already provided for a research study. Consent Addendum. 3-11-2020.
Questions from potential participants about the research study are directed to the principal investigator (and/or primary contact). The consent form must include their name, title(s), phone number and/or email. Question about participant's rights or research-related injury should be directed to the Institutional Review Board (IRB): Crown ...
Whenever you are proposing research with human participants you must provide a form, known as an Informed Consent Form (ICF), with each proposal to indicate that the research participant has decided to take part in the research of her/his own free will. If the research involves more than one group of individuals, for example healthcare users ...
The consent process includes highlighting the changes for existing participants and obtaining a signature on the revised form or obtaining oral consent as allowable under federal regulations. Typically recommended when: The information affects both current participants and participants enrolled in the future.
The Research Ethics Board must approve any changes to the consent form before the research begins. Changes to an approved study and its documents are done via an Amendment. Your application will be sent back, and approval delayed, if a complete consent form or ... with research participants and/or their data. Include their role in the study ...
Informed Consent in Research. Informed consent is a process of communication between a researcher and a potential participant in which the researcher provides adequate information about the study, its risks and benefits, and the participant voluntarily agrees to participate. It is a cornerstone of ethical research involving human subjects and is intended to protect the rights and welfare of ...
Additionally, describing how participants' identities will be protected is a critical part of the process. Verbiage and content for the typical consent agreement is often spelled out by your academic institution or discipline. However, sometimes the institutional form letters researchers are required to use tend to be formal and legalistic.
the research process. The researcher should retain one copy of the consent form signed by both themse. ves and the participant. The participant should also be given a copy of the consent form as a record of wha. they have signed up to.Even if a person has signed a consent form consent should still be re-established at the poin.
2023-04-10. Assent Form Ages 7-14. 2023-06-27. Consent Addendum for Unencrypted Communication. 2020-10-26. Information or Fact Sheet. 2023-04-10. The following documents are samples. IRBIS does NOT generate these documents with application-specific information.
Guidance on obtaining consent from research participants online (for online and in-person study designs), Authors: Dr Pippa Lally, Behavioural Science and Health, and Jack Hindley, Information Services Division, UCL; Recording & Obtaining Consent, UCL Research Ethics Committee Guidance Note 2: Extract from Nuffield Council on Bioethics website
If you like, a summary of the results of the study will be sent to you. If you have any other concerns about your rights as a research participant that have not been answered by the investigators, you may contact the Smith College Institutional Review Board at [email protected] or (413) 585-3562.
participants. The study team should wait to reconsent participants with the revised translated consent form, unless the study team determines it is in the best interest of the participant to be informed of the changes before the translation is available. If for some reason the information in the modified consent needs to be provided to participants
(c) An IRB may waive the requirement for the investigator to obtain a signed consent form for some or all subjects if it finds either: (1) That the only record linking the subject and the research would be the consent document and the principal risk would be potential harm resulting from a breach of confidentiality.
Sample consent and permission forms. General consent form to participate in research (DOC) Two stage project consent form (DOC) Parent permission form for research with child (DOC) Child assent form (DOC) Multiple consent form including audio-recording and quotations (DOC) Photo and video consent form (DOC)
CONSENT FORM FOR (INSERT NAME) RESEARCH TITLE: RESEARCHER/S: I have been given information about research title and discussed the research project with researcher's name who is conducting this research as part of a degree name supervised by supervisor in the department of department at the University of Wollongong. I have been advised of the potential risks and burdens associated with this ...
Informed consent is the process of telling potential research participants about the key elements of a research study and what their participation will involve. The informed consent process is one of the central components of the ethical conduct of research with human subjects. The consent process typically includes providing a written consent ...
Before you join a cancer research study, you'll receive an informed consent form to review, ask questions about, and sign. The form covers a description of the study's purpose, procedures and safety measures researchers will follow, and what is expected of study participants. The form is part of the informed consent process.
The consent signature requirements from the mother and father are summarised in table 3. Once the informed consent is obtained, the pregnant women will be included into any phase of the study unless the research project will be compromised or the patient's health (mother and/or fetus) will be in danger.
The Consent Form Addendum is designed to facilitate the "re-consent" process by emphasizing the revisions. Subjects must sign the updated consent form. Participants do not need to be given the Bill of Rights at the time of re-consent. Participants do not need to re-sign the HIPPA Authorization Form at the time of reconsent, unless either of the ...
The forms should be provided to participants in addition to the main study consent form. The language in these forms can also be adapted and added to consent forms for studies in which COVID-19 screening and testing procedures are being done for study purposes, i.e., the results of the screening and/or testing will be used as study data.
-An IRB may waive the requirement for an investigator to obtain a signed consent form for some or all subjects. -Potential participants are presented (either verbally or in writing) with the same information required in . a written consent document, but documentation of the process (signing of the consent form) has . been waived by the IRB.
FDA believes that obtaining a research participant's verbal or written informed consent is only part of the process. Informed consent involves providing a potential participant with: adequate ...
The HHS regulations at 45 CFR part 46 for the protection of human subjects in research require that an investigator obtain the legally effective informed consent of the subject or the subject's legally authorized representative, unless (1) the research is exempt under 45 CFR 46.101(b); (2) the IRB finds and documents that informed consent can be waived (45 CFR 46.116(c) or (d)); or (3) the ...
Informed consent is one of the founding principles of research ethics. Its intent is that human participants can enter research freely (voluntarily) with full information about what it means for them to take part, and that they give consent before they enter the research. Consent should be obtained before the participant enters the research ...
Signed consent forms were returned and informed consent was verbally re-confirmed at the interview. Pseudonyms have been used for all ... Two participants in this research study appeared comfortable and not precious about their unique identity, which could be attributed to how time and experience had made them feel secure in their identity and ...