With increased longevity and growth in the number of older adults comes rising rates of individuals with cognitive impairment and dementia. The expansion of this population has important implications for research on aging and dementia syndromes, namely increased enrollment of older individuals in clinical research. Ethical prerogatives, as well as historical underrepresentation of persons with dementia in research studies due to the perceived burden of traditional decisional capacity evaluations, necessitates the development of pragmatic approaches to ascertain decisional abilities in research settings. We outline a protocol used in the Wisconsin Alzheimer’s Disease Research Center (ADRC) that adopts a stepped approach to the evaluation of decisional capacity meant to maximize study visit efficiency while preserving participant safety and autonomy. The protocol specifies the structure of the consent process and incorporates a brief semi-structured interview based on Appelbaum & Grisso’s theoretical model for evaluating a patient’s decisional capacity to provide informed consent to participate in research. This protocol is easily implemented in a research study visit and is designed to minimize participant burden and ensure reliable assessment of decisional capacity in older adults across a wide range of research protocols. The protocol emphasizes capacity optimization, using memory aids and other compensatory strategies to preserve participant autonomy while protecting welfare.
GradyC, CummingsSR, RowbothamMC, McConnellMV, AshleyEA, KangG (2017) The changing face of clinical trials: Informed consent. N Engl J Med376, 856–867.
2.
SchenkerY, MeiselA (2011) Informed consent in clinical care: Practical considerations in the effort to achieve ethical goals. JAMA305, 1130–1131.
3.
World Medical Association (2001) World Medical Association Declaration of Helsinki. Ethical principles for medical research involving human subjects. Bull World Health Organ79, 373–374.
4.
RobertsLW (2002) Informed consent and the capacity for voluntarism. Am J Psychiatry159, 705–712.
5.
LeoRJ (1999) Competency and the capacity to make treatment decisions: A primer for primary care physicians. Prim Care Companion J Clin Psychiatry1, 131–141.
6.
University of Minnesota External Review Team (2015) An External Review of the Protection of Human Research Participants at the University of Minnesota with Special Attention to Research with Adults Who May Lack Decision- Making Capacity, Minnesota Legislative Reference Library, https://www.leg.state.mn.us/docs/2015/other/150595.pdf, Posted 23 February 2015, Accessed 10 October 2019.
7.
TaylorJS, DeMersSM, VigEK, BorsonS (2012) The disappearing subject: Exclusion of people with cognitive impairment and dementia from geriatrics research. J Am Geriatr Soc60, 413–419.
8.
HubbardG, DownsMG, TesterS (2003) Including older people with dementia in research: Challenges and strategies. Aging Ment Health7, 351–362.
9.
TrivediRB, HumphreysK (2015) Participant exclusion criteria in treatment research on neurological disorders: Are unrepresentative study samples problematic?Contemp Clin Trials44, 20–25.
10.
RaymontV (2002) ‘Not in perfect mind’–the complexity of clinical capacity assessment. Psychiatr Bull6,, 201–204.
11.
WeisstubD (1990) Enquiry on Mental Competency: Final Report, Queen’s Printer, Toronto.
12.
DraneJF (1985) The many faces of competency. Hastings Cent Rep4, 17–21.
13.
DrapeJF (1984) Competency to give an informed consent. A model for making clinical assessments. J Am Med Assoc252, 925–927.
14.
AlvaroLC (2012) Competency: General principles and applicability in dementia. Neurologia27, 290–300.
15.
KappMB (1998) Decisional capacity, older human research subjects, and IRBs: Beyond forms and guidelines. Stanford Law Pol Rev9, 359–371.
16.
SturmanED (2005) The capacity to consent to treatment and research: A review of standardized assessment tools. Clin Psychol Rev25, 954–974.
17.
VincentGK, VelkoffVA (2010) The next four decades: The older population in the United States: 2010 to 2050, US Department of Commerce, Economics and Statistics Administration, US Census Bureau.
18.
RodinMB, MohileSG (2008) Assessing decisional capacity in the elderly. Semin Oncol35, 625–632.
19.
RoccaWA, PetersenRC, KnopmanDS, HebertLE, EvansDA, HallKS, GaoS, UnverzagtFW, LangaKM, LarsonEB (2011) Trends in the incidence and prevalence of Alzheimer’s disease, dementia, and cognitive impairment in the United States. Alzheimers Dement7, 80–93.
20.
CorradaMM, BrookmeyerR, Paganini-HillA, BerlauD, KawasCH (2010) Dementia incidence continues to increase with age in the oldest old: the 90+ study. Ann Neurol67, 114–121.
21.
PrinceM, GuerchetM, PrinaM (2013) The global impact of dementia 2013-2050. Alzheimer’s Disease International, London.
22.
JeffersonAL, LambeS, MoserDJ, ByerlyLK, OzonoffA, KarlawishJH (2008) Decisional capacity for research participation in individuals with mild cognitive impairment. J Am Geriatr Soc56, 1236–1243.
23.
MoyeJ, MarsonDC (2007) Assessment of decision-making capacity in older adults: An emerging area of practice and research. J Gerontol B Psychol Sci Soc Sci62, P3–P11.
24.
United States National Commission for the Protection of Human Subjects of Biomedical and Behavioral Research (1979) The Belmont Report: Ethical principles and guidelines for the protection of human subjects of research, US Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, Washington, DC.
25.
BamfordC, EcclesM, SteenN, RobinsonL (2007) Can primary care record review facilitate earlier diagnosis of dementia?Fam Pract24, 108–116.
26.
SavvaGM, ArthurA (2015) Who has undiagnosed dementia? A cross-sectional analysis of participants of the Aging, Demographics and Memory Study. Age Ageing44, 642–647.
PrinceM, BryceR, FerrC (2011), World Alzheimer’s Report 2011. The benefits of early diagnosis and intervention. Alzheimer’s Disease International, London.
29.
AppelbaumPS (2007) Assessment of patients’ competence to consent to treatment. N Engl J Med357, 1834–1840.
30.
KimSY, CaineED, CurrierGW (2001) Assessing the competence of persons with Alzheimer’s disease in providing informed consent for participation in research. Am J Psychiatry158, 712–717.
31.
AppelbaumPS, GrissoT (1988) Assessing patients’ capacities to consent to treatment. N Engl J Med319, 1635–1638.
MastBT (2011) Whole person dementia assessment, Health Professions Press, Inc., Baltimore, MD.
34.
DunnLB, NowrangiMA, PalmerBW, JesteDV, SaksER (2006) Assessing decisional capacity for clinical research or treatment: A review of instruments. Am J Psychiatry163, 1323–1334.
35.
KimSY, CaineED (2002) Utility and limits of the mini mental state examination in evaluating consent capacity in Alzheimer’s disease. Psychiatr Serv53, 1322–1324.
36.
LaiJM, KarlawishJ (2007) Assessing the capacity to make everyday decisions: A guide for clinicians and an agenda for future research. Am J Geriatr Psychiatry15, 101–111.
37.
VellingaA, SmitJH, van LeeuwenE, van TilburgW, JonkerC (2004) Instruments to assess decision-making capacity: An overview. Int Psychogeriatr16, 397–419.
38.
PalmerBW, DunnLB, AppelbaumPS, MudaliarS, ThalL, HenryR, GolshanS, JesteDV (2005) Assessment of capacity to consent to research among older persons with schizophrenia, Alzheimer disease, or diabetes mellitus: Comparison of a 3-item questionnaire with a comprehensive standardized capacity instrument. Arch Gen Psychiatry62, 726–733.
39.
LimVW, RowlandJ, PandyS (2015) Evaluation of a new screening tool: Lucidity in Mental Capacity (LIMCap) assessment tool. J Gerontol Geriatr Res4, 228.
40.
SeamanJB, TerhorstL, GentryA, HunsakerA, ParkerLS, LinglerJH (2015) Psychometric properties of a decisional capacity screening tool for individuals contemplating participation in Alzheimer’s disease research. J Alzheimers Dis46, 1–9.
41.
Del CarmenMG, JoffeS (2005) Informed consent for medical treatment and research: A review. Oncologist10, 636–641.
42.
United States Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS) Human Subjects Protection Regulations (2009) Protection of Human Subjects 45 CFR §46, Office for Human Research Protections, https://www.hhs.gov/ohrp/sites/default/files/ohrp/humansubjects/regbook2013.pdf, Posted 15 January 2009, Accessed 20 September 2019.
43.
HighDM (1992) Research with Alzheimer’s disease subjects: Informed consent and proxy decision making. J Am Geriatr Soc40, 950–957.
44.
Institute of Medicine (US) Committee on a National Research Agenda on Aging (1991) Extending Life, Enhancing Life: A National Research Agenda on Aging. National Academies Press, Washington, DC.
45.
SugarmanJ, CainC, WallaceR, Welsh-BohmerKA (2001) How proxies make decisions about research for patients with Alzheimer’s disease. J Am Geriatr Soc49, 1110–1119.
46.
SlaughterS, ColeD, JenningsE, ReimerMA (2007) Consent and assent to participate in research from people with dementia. Nurs Ethics14, 27–40.
47.
KuczewskiMG, MarshallP (2002) The decision dynamics of clinical research: The context and process of informed consent. Med Care40, V45–V54.
48.
AppelbaumPS, RothLH, LidzCW, BensonP, WinsladeW (1987) False hopes and best data: Consent to research and the therapeutic misconception. Hastings Cent Rep17, 20–24.
49.
American Bar Association / American Psychological Association (2008) Assessment of Older Adults with Diminished Capacity: A Handbook for Psychologists, American Bar Association Commission on Law and Aging – American Psychological Association, https://www.apa.org/pi/aging/programs/assessment/capacity-psychologist-handbook.pdf, Accessed 14 August 2019.
50.
GrissoT, AppelbaumPS (1998) Assessing competence to consent to treatment: A guide for physicians and other health professionals, Oxford University Press, USA.
51.
GilbertT, BosquetA, Thomas-AntérionC, BonnefoyM, Le SauxO (2017) Assessing capacity to consent for research in cognitively impaired older patients. Clin Interv Aging12, 1553–1563.
52.
MarsonDC, IngramKK, CodyHA, HarrellLE (1995) Assessing the competency of patients with Alzheimer’s disease under different legal standards: A prototype instrument. Arch Neurol52, 949–954.
53.
EtchellsE (2008) Aid to capacity evaluation (ACE), University of Toronto, Joint Centre for Bioethics, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
54.
LaiJM, GillTM, CooneyLM, BradleyEH, HawkinsKA, KarlawishJH (2008) Everyday decision-making ability in older persons with cognitive impairment. Am J Geriatr Psychiatry16, 693–696.
55.
SchmandB, GouwenbergB, SmitJH, JonkerC (1999) Assessment of mental competency in community-dwelling elderly. Alzheimer Dis Assoc Disord13, 80–87.
56.
SugarmanJ, LavoriPW, BoegerM, CainC, EdsonR, MorrisonV, YehSS (2005) Evaluating the quality of informed consent. Clin Trials2, 34–41.
57.
SaksER, DunnLB, MarshallBJ, NayakGV, GolshanS, JesteDV (2002) The California Scale of Appreciation: A new instrument to measure the appreciation component of capacity to consent to research. Am J Geriatr Psychiatry10, 166–174.
58.
CarneyMT, NeugroschlJ, MorrisonRS, MarinD, SiuAL (2001) The development and piloting of a capacity assessment tool. J Clin Ethics12, 17–23.
59.
ZayasLH, CabassaLJ, PerezMC (2005) Capacity-to-consent in psychiatric research: Development and preliminary testing of a screening tool. Res Soc Work Pract15, 545–556.
60.
BeanG, NishisatoS, RectorNA, GlancyG (1994) The psychometric properties of the Competency Interview Schedule. Can J Psychiatry39, 368–376.
61.
ResnickB, Gruber-BaldiniAL, Pretzer-AboffI, GalikE, BuieVC, RussK, ZimmermanS (2007) Reliability and validity of the evaluation to sign consent measure. Gerontologist47, 69–77.
62.
JanofskyJS, McCarthyRJ, FoisteinMF (1992) The Hopkins Competency Assessment Test: A brief method for evaluating patients’ capacity to give informed consent. Psychiatr Serv43, 132–136.
63.
WirshingDA, WirshingWC, MarderSR, LibermanRP, MintzJ (1998) Informed consent: Assessment of comprehension. Am J Psychiatry155, 1508–1511.
64.
AppelbaumPS, GrissoT (2001) MacArthur Competence Assessment Tool for Clinical Research (MacCAT-CR), Professional Resource Press, Sarasota, FL.
65.
GrissoT, AppelbaumPS (1991) Mentally ill and non-mentally-ill patients’ abilities to understand informed consent disclosures for medication. Law Hum Behav15, 377–388.
66.
LeeM (2010) The capacity to consent to research among older adults. Educ Gerontol36, 592–603.
67.
TomodaA, YasumiyaR, SumiyamaT, TsukadaK, HayakawaT, MatsubaraK, KitamuraF, KitamuraT (1997) Validity and reliability of structured interview for competency incompetency assessment testing and ranking inventory. J Clin Psychol53, 443–450.
68.
JoffeS, CookEF, ClearyPD, ClarkJW, WeeksJC (2001) Quality of informed consent: A new measure of understanding among research subjects. J Natl Cancer Inst93, 139–147.
69.
JesteDV, PalmerBW, AppelbaumPS, GolshanS, GloriosoD, DunnLB, KimK, MeeksT, KraemerHC (2007) A new brief instrument for assessing decisional capacity for clinical research. Arch Gen Psychiatry64, 966–974.
