Public attitudes towards consent for the donation of surplus frozen eggs to research.

STUDY QUESTION: In the context of donating surplus frozen eggs (SFE) to research, what level of information disclosure, and associated consent model, do the public believe most effectively allows donors to make an informed decision, exercise autonomy, and be treated morally? SUMMARY ANSWER: The public supports the information disclosure requirements of both a specific and broad consent model in this context, with the latter considered to better enhance autonomy and facilitate the moral treatment of SFE donors. WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY: Despite research indicating that many individuals' first preference is to donate their SFEs to research, donation rates remain low. One possible reason for this is the way consent processes for the donation of SFEs to research are currently regulated, specifically that their high information requirements limit opportunities to donate. There is a notable lack of research on how consent processes should operate, and more specifically, how much information a person should be provided before providing consent, in the context of donating SFEs to research. STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION: An online experimental survey of 225 participants was conducted. The survey assessed the impact of two variables-Information Disclosure and Preference Fulfilment-on participants' views towards whether a consent process allowed for informed, autonomous consent and the moral treatment of donors. PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS: A nationally representative sample of the UK public was recruited using the online platform Prolific. The survey consisted of a vignette-based experimental design, one free-text question, and demographic data collection. Quantitative data were summarized using descriptive statistics and the relationship between variables was tested using ANOVAs and t-tests, where appropriate. Inductive content analysis through manual coding was performed on the free-text question. MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE: Participants considered both specific and broad information disclosure as sufficient for informed consent (mean Consent Judgements M = 6.49/7 and M = 5.79/7, respectively). The ability to fulfil disposition preferences was critical to the public's assessment of whether a consent process enabled donors to act autonomously and be treated morally. Participants agreed that a potential donor was able to make an autonomous decision if their preference to donate their SFEs to research was fulfilled (mean Autonomy Judgement M = 5.46/7, mean Moral Judgement M = 5.63/7), but not when it was not (mean Autonomy Judgement M = 3.96/7, mean Moral Judgement: M = 4.76/7). LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION: Ecological validity of online surveys is limited, and data may be subject to response biases. Additionally, the sample size was relatively small. Finally, since the sample population was based in the UK, the generalizability of the survey findings to other countries may be limited. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS: Our findings underscore the need to review and possibly update consent processes for the donation of SFEs to research. We encourage policy discussion in light of our findings, specifically the consideration of a shift towards a broad consent model. Doing so may allow more donors to fulfil their disposition preference, facilitate the movement of SFEs out of storage, and respond to the shortage of eggs currently available for research. STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S): This research was supported by The British Academy (grant number KF8\230096). The survey component of this study was funded by the Uehiro Oxford Institute. M.J. has received research funding from Monash IVF and Ferring Pharmaceuticals. She reports honorarium and travel support from Gideon Richter. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: N/A.