Brigette White - Comment

Document ID: FDA-2009-N-0592-0008
Document Type: Public Submission
Agency: Food And Drug Administration
Received Date: January 07 2010, at 12:00 AM Eastern Standard Time
Date Posted: January 8 2010, at 12:00 AM Eastern Standard Time
Comment Start Date: December 29 2009, at 12:00 AM Eastern Standard Time
Comment Due Date: March 1 2010, at 11:59 PM Eastern Standard Time
Tracking Number: 80a785dd
View Document:  View as format xml

This is comment on Proposed Rule

Informed Consent Elements

View Comment

I understand the rationale to include this as an essential element of the informed consent due to the vast majority of trials this effects. However, given that some clinical trials don't meet the requirement for registration with clinicaltrials.gov, should the proposed required statement for the informed consent be revised to include an alternate statement to the effect that 'this trial is not required or will not be included in the databank'? It would be necessary for the informed consent document/process not to state an inclusion in the database if one will not occur. If this rule is approved as an essential element, is the requirement that existing consents are to be revised to include this information or will it only apply to new consents post approval?

Related Comments

    View All
Total: 63
Methodist Healthcare System IRB - Comment
Public Submission    Posted: 01/07/2010     ID: FDA-2009-N-0592-0006

Mar 01,2010 11:59 PM ET
Brigette White - Comment
Public Submission    Posted: 01/08/2010     ID: FDA-2009-N-0592-0008

Mar 01,2010 11:59 PM ET
Anonymous - Comment
Public Submission    Posted: 01/19/2010     ID: FDA-2009-N-0592-0010

Mar 01,2010 11:59 PM ET
Day Werts - Comment
Public Submission    Posted: 01/25/2010     ID: FDA-2009-N-0592-0011

Mar 01,2010 11:59 PM ET
Quintin Loden Whitaker - Comment
Public Submission    Posted: 01/28/2010     ID: FDA-2009-N-0592-0013

Mar 01,2010 11:59 PM ET