Coercion and informed consent in research involving prisoners☆
Section snippets
Method
This project was approved by the University of Iowa’s Institutional Review Board (IRB). All subjects provided written informed consent to participate, following a thorough interactive discussion of the study’s procedures, risks, and benefits, and no subjects were found to lack adequate decisional capacity during this process. All assessment procedures were administered by trained research assistants.
Neuropsychological and psychiatric symptom scores
As shown in Table 1, the prison group performed significantly more poorly on RBANS Total Scale Score than did the control group, and follow-up t tests revealed that this was also the case on all of the other neuropsychological scores, with the sole exception of the RBANS Language domain. As shown in Table 2, the prison group yielded a significantly higher SCL-90-R Global Severity Index score than did the control group, and this was also the case with all nine subdomains of the SCL-90-R.
Discussion
The above data indicate that, although 29 of 30 individuals in the prison group and all 30 individuals in the control group demonstrated adequate capacity to provide consent to the hypothetical drug trial as measured by the ESC, those in the prison group earned significantly inferior MacCAT-CR scores regarding ability to understand consent form information and appreciate the potential effects of participating versus not participating. Second, neuropsychological functioning was consistently and
Acknowledgements
The authors thank John Monahan, Ph.D. of the University of Virginia and the MacArthur Foundation Research Network and staff members at the Iowa Medical and Classification Center for assistance with this study.
References (18)
Perceived coercion among committed, detained, and voluntary patients
Int J Law Psychiatry
(1999)Bureau of Justice Statistics—Prison Statistics
(2002)Bureau of Justice Special Report—Mental health and treatment of inmates and probationers. July
(1999)Office for Human Research Protections IRB Guidebook
(2002)- et al.
The burdens of research in prisons
IRB
(1982) - et al.
MacArthur Competence Assessment ToolClinical Research (MacCAT-CR)
(2001) - et al.
Assessment of capacity to give consent to research participationstate-of-the-art and beyond
J Health Care Law Policy
(1998) - et al.
Capacity to provide informed consent for participation in schizophrenia and HIV research
Am J Psychiatry
(2002) Repeatable Battery for the Assessment of Neuropsychological Status
(1998)
Cited by (93)
Restraint prevalence and perceived coercion among psychiatric inpatients from South India: A prospective study
2018, Asian Journal of PsychiatryCitation Excerpt :Subjective coercion as measured through the coercion ladder, a structured interview developed for Indian healthcare settings (Gowda et al., 2017), or the Coercion Experience Scale (CES) (Bergk et al., 2010). Perceived coercion measured through MacArthur perceived coercion scale (MAES) (Gardner et al., 1993) or the Iowa Coercion Questionnaire (ICQ) (Moser et al., 2004). Many studies evaluated coercion by assessing a single measure, concluding that it is influenced by socio-demographic and clinical variables, for example, age, gender, absent insight, severity of illness, and global functioning (Rain et al., 2003; Bindman et al., 2005; Cusack et al., 2010; Steinert et al., 2010; Sheehan and Burns, 2011; Fiorillo et al., 2012; Anestis et al., 2013; O’ Donoghue et al., 2014).
Meeting Complex Needs of Sexually Assaulted Incarcerated Individuals: Impact of Expert Sexual Assault Nurse Examiner Care via Telehealth
2024, Journal of Correctional Health CareMeasuring Contraceptive Autonomy at Two Sites in Burkina Faso: A First Attempt to Measure a Novel Family Planning Indicator
2023, Studies in Family Planning
- ☆
Supported by a Clinical Research Award granted to D.J.M. by the University of Iowa College of Medicine.