Informed, autonomous and safe: a qualitative study describing the views of English adolescents on consent to participate in medical research

Introduction There is confusion in practice regarding the role of adolescents in consenting to their participation in medical research. There are lack of studies investigating the views of adolescents on the process of consenting to participate in research and what this should look like. This study provides a qualitative account of adolescents’ views on this process. Methods Qualitative interviews or written responses were collected from 25 adolescents (aged 14–17 years). Views were explored using a story completion method, where participants were given a stem scenario and asked to state what they thought should happen next. Thematic analysis was undertaken to identify key codes and themes. Results Our participants saw parents as an important source of information and often valued their advice. They wanted to make autonomous, informed decisions and thought their parents would contribute to the process of becoming informed. They assessed the risk of participation based on trust of familiar institutions and processes. Discussion English law sees adolescent medical consent in terms of competence but is not clear about research consent. We may be doing a disservice to adolescents by not providing support to help adolescents attain competence prior to decision-making. This could be provided by a parent or another trusted adult. Conclusion Our participants valued input from their parents and want to be supported in making decisions regarding participation in medical research.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Archives of Disease in Childhood
Published
2026-08-18
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1136/archdischild-2026-330830
Primary Topic
Ethics in Clinical Research
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Informed, autonomous and safe: a qualitative study describing the views of English adolescents on consent to participate in medical research

Harriet Fisher, Felicity Davies, Giles Birchley
Archives of Disease in Childhood
Ethics in Clinical Research
article

Informed, autonomous and safe: a qualitative study describing the views of English adolescents on consent to participate in medical research

Harriet Fisher, Felicity Davies, Giles Birchley
article en

Abstract

Introduction There is confusion in practice regarding the role of adolescents in consenting to their participation in medical research. There are lack of studies investigating the views of adolescents on the process of consenting to participate in research and what this should look like. This study provides a qualitative account of adolescents’ views on this process. Methods Qualitative interviews or written responses were collected from 25 adolescents (aged 14–17 years). Views were explored using a story completion method, where participants were given a stem scenario and asked to state what they thought should happen next. Thematic analysis was undertaken to identify key codes and themes. Results Our participants saw parents as an important source of information and often valued their advice. They wanted to make autonomous, informed decisions and thought their parents would contribute to the process of becoming informed. They assessed the risk of participation based on trust of familiar institutions and processes. Discussion English law sees adolescent medical consent in terms of competence but is not clear about research consent. We may be doing a disservice to adolescents by not providing support to help adolescents attain competence prior to decision-making. This could be provided by a parent or another trusted adult. Conclusion Our participants valued input from their parents and want to be supported in making decisions regarding participation in medical research.

Archives of Disease in Childhood
University Hospitals Bristol NHS Foundation Trust (GB), National Institute for Health and Care Research (GB), University of Bristol (GB)
Peace, Justice and strong institutions
Openalex Percentile: Top 7%
Ethics in Clinical Research
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.