Informed consent for MRI and fMRI research: Analysis of a sample of Canadian consent documents

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Research ethics and the measures deployed to ensure ethical oversight of research (e.g., informed consent forms, ethics review) are vested with extremely important ethical and practical goals. Accordingly, these measures need to function effectively in real-world research and to follow high level standards.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>We examined approved consent forms for Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) and functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging (fMRI) studies approved by Canadian research ethics boards (REBs).</p> <p>Results</p> <p>We found evidence of variability in consent forms in matters of physical and psychological risk reporting. Approaches used to tackle the emerging issue of incidental findings exposed extensive variability between and within research sites.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>The causes of variability in approved consent forms and studies need to be better understood. However, mounting evidence of administrative and practical hurdles within current ethics governance systems combined with potential sub-optimal provision of information to and protection of research subjects support other calls for more scrutiny of research ethics practices and applicable revisions.</p

The re-identification risk of Canadians from longitudinal demographics

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>The public is less willing to allow their personal health information to be disclosed for research purposes if they do not trust researchers and how researchers manage their data. However, the public is more comfortable with their data being used for research if the risk of re-identification is low. There are few studies on the risk of re-identification of Canadians from their basic demographics, and no studies on their risk from their longitudinal data. Our objective was to estimate the risk of re-identification from the basic cross-sectional and longitudinal demographics of Canadians.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>Uniqueness is a common measure of re-identification risk. Demographic data on a 25% random sample of the population of Montreal were analyzed to estimate population uniqueness on postal code, date of birth, and gender as well as their generalizations, for periods ranging from 1 year to 11 years.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Almost 98% of the population was unique on full postal code, date of birth and gender: these three variables are effectively a unique identifier for Montrealers. Uniqueness increased for longitudinal data. Considerable generalization was required to reach acceptably low uniqueness levels, especially for longitudinal data. Detailed guidelines and disclosure policies on how to ensure that the re-identification risk is low are provided.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>A large percentage of Montreal residents are unique on basic demographics. For non-longitudinal data sets, the three character postal code, gender, and month/year of birth represent sufficiently low re-identification risk. Data custodians need to generalize their demographic information further for longitudinal data sets.</p

Interagencey Advisory Panel on Research Ethics (PRE)

Titre de la page Web (visionnée le 22 mai 2008)