HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS		QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:

This Article Full Text Full Text (PDF) Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by McDermott, B. E. Articles by Scott, C. L. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by McDermott, B. E. Articles by Scott, C. L.

Capacity of Forensic Patients to Consent to Research: The Use of the MacCAT-CR

Dr. McDermott and Dr. Scott are Associate Professors, and Dr. Quanbeck is Assistant Professor, Department of Psychiatry, Forensic Division, UC Davis School of Medicine, Sacramento, CA. Dr. Gerbasi is in private practice in Davis, CA. This research was conducted as part of a collaborative effort between Napa State Hospital and the UC Davis School of Medicine, Department of Psychiatry, funded by the California Department of Mental Health. This report was presented as Research in Progress at the annual meeting of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law, San Antonio, TX, October 16–19, 2003. Address correspondence to: Barbara E. McDermott, PhD, Department of Psychiatry, Forensic Division, UC Davis School of Medicine, 2230 Stockton Boulevard, Sacramento, CA 95817. E-mail: bemcdermott{at}ucdavis.edu

The ability of psychiatric patients and prisoners to provide informed consent to participate in clinical research has given rise to much debate. Forensic psychiatric patients present a particular concern regarding their competence to consent to research, as they are both patients and prisoners. The primary goal of this research was to evaluate whether, by employing structured assessments of capacity to consent to research, we could determine if this combined vulnerability leads to differences in competence from the published abilities of nonforensic psychiatric patients. Subjects deemed incapable of providing informed consent scored differently and lower than the other consent groups on three aspects of the decision-making process. Diagnosis evidenced only a slight relationship to decision-making abilities, and this difference was only in the ability to understand the basic procedural elements of the research. Psychiatric symptoms were modestly related to decision-making. Positive symptoms were associated with poorer performance on the Understanding subscale of the MacCAT-CR, and negative symptoms were associated with lowered performance on the Reasoning subscale. These results are in accord with several published studies of nonforensic psychiatric patients and suggest that concerns regarding both forensic and nonforensic psychiatric patients' ability to provide informed consent may be unwarranted, especially in patients with few active symptoms.

This article has been cited by other articles:

				D. Mossman Predicting Restorability of Incompetent Criminal Defendants J Am Acad Psychiatry Law, March 1, 2007; 35(1): 34 - 43. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				H. R. Lamb Commentary: On Research and Forensic Patients' Capacity J Am Acad Psychiatry Law, September 1, 2005; 33(3): 308 - 309. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]