Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
  1. Home
  2. Search

Refine search

Refine search

Access:
Content type:
Publication date:
Apply
Subject: Show more
Journals Show more
Publishers: Show more
Societies Show more
Series: Show more
Collections: Show more

Actions for selected content:

Select all | Deselect all
  • View selected items
  • Export citations
  • Download PDF (zip)
  • Save to Kindle
  • Save to Dropbox
  • Save to Google Drive

Save Search

You can save your searches here and later view and run them again in "My saved searches".

Please provide a title, maximum of 40 characters.
Cancel
×

1 results

  • Determining when impairment constitutes incapacity for informed consent in schizophrenia research
  • Scott Y. H. Kim, Paul S. Appelbaum, Jeffrey Swan, T. Scott Stroup, Joseph P. McEvoy, Donald C. Goff, Dilip V. Jeste, J. Steven Lamberti, Adrian Leibovici, Eric D. Caine
  • Journal: The British Journal of Psychiatry / Volume 191 / Issue 1 / July 2007
  • Published online by Cambridge University Press: 02 January 2018, pp. 38-43
  • Print publication: July 2007
    • Article
      • You have access
    • PDF
    • HTML
    • Export citation
  • View abstract
    Background

    Although people with schizophrenia display impaired abilities for consent, it is not known how much impairment constitutes incapacity.

    Aims

    To assess a method for determining the categorical capacity status of potential participants in schizophrenia research.

    Method

    Expert-judgement validation of capacity thresholds on the sub-scales of the MacArthur Competence Assessment Tool – Clinical Research (MacCAT–CR) was evaluated using receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis in 91 people with severe mental illness and 40 controls.

    Results

    The ROC areas under the curve for the understanding, appreciation and reasoning sub-scales of the MacCAT–CR were 0.94 (95% CI 0.88–0.99), 0.85 (95% CI 0.76–0.94) and 0.80 (95% CI 0.70–0.90). These findings yielded negative and positive predictive values of incapacity that can guide the practice of investigators and research ethics committees.

    Conclusions

    By performing such validation studies for a few categories of research with varying risks and benefits, it might be possible to create evidence-based capacity determination guidelines for most schizophrenia research.