Therapeutic misconception—a false belief that individuals will benefit from participating in research—can bias informed consent. Ethics consultants can help by engaging participants’ and researchers’ understandings of risks and benefits and by asking good questions about the influences of researchers’ enthusiasm.
AMA J Ethics. 2018;20(11):E1100-1106. doi:
10.1001/amajethics.2018.1100.
Hannah R. Sullivan and Scott J. Schweikart, JD, MBE
Legal questions regarding clinicians’ and technology manufacturers’ liability arise when algorithmic recommendations generated by the technology are hard to understand.
AMA J Ethics. 2019;21(2):E160-166. doi:
10.1001/amajethics.2019.160.
Efrat Lelkes, MD, Angira Patel, MD, MPH, Anna Joong, MD, and Jeffrey G. Gossett, MD
Current policy requires separate informed consent for some Public Health Service increased-risk donors, and this can make shared decision making harder.
AMA J Ethics. 2020;22(5):E401-407. doi:
10.1001/amajethics.2020.401.
Haley Moulton, Benjamin Moulton, JD, MPH, Tim Lahey, MD, MMSc, and Glyn Elwyn, MD, PhD, MSc
Shared decision making in research informed consent conversations is complex due to diverse and potentially divergent interests of investigators and patient-subjects.
AMA J Ethics. 2020;22(5):E365-371. doi:
10.1001/amajethics.2020.365.