biostudies-literatureDickert NWNational Institute of Neurological Disorders and StrokeNICHD NIH HHSNational Heart, Lung, and Blood InstituteNHLBI NIH HHSNINDS NIH HHS1183-1194https://www.ebi.ac.uk/biostudies/studies/S-EPMC8523587biostudies-literatureUnknown28(10)<h4>Background</h4>Exception from informed consent (EFIC) regulations for research in emergency settings contain unique requirements for community consultation and public disclosure. These requirements address ethical challenges intrinsic to this research context. Multiple approaches have evolved to accomplish these activities that may reflect and advance different aims. This scoping review was designed to identify areas of consensus and lingering uncertainty in the literature.<h4>Methods</h4>Scoping review methodology was used. Conceptual and empirical literature related to community consultation and public disclosure for EFIC research was included and identified through a structured search using Embase, HEIN Online, PubMed, and Web of Science. Data were extracted using a standardized tool with domains for major literature categories.<h4>Results</h4>Among 84 manuscripts, major domains included conceptual or policy issues, reports of community consultation processes and results, and reports of public disclosure processes and results. Areas of consensus related to community consultation included the need for a two-way exchange of information and use of multiple methods. Public acceptance of personal EFIC enrollment is commonly 64% to 85%. There is less consensus regarding how to assess attitudes, what "communities" to prioritize, and how to determine adequacy for individual projects. Core goals of public disclosure are less well developed; no metrics exist for assessing adequacy.<h4>Conclusions</h4>Multiple methods are used to meet community consultation and public disclosure requirements. There remain no settled norms for assessing adequacy of public disclosure, and there is lingering debate about needed breadth and depth of community consultation.Academic emergency medicine : official journal of the Society for Academic Emergency MedicineMeeting unique requirements: Community consultation and public disclosure for research in emergency setting using exception from informed consent.PMC8523587U24NS10065902S1R01 HD086676U24 NS100655U24 NS100659U24NS10065502S1Silbergleit RMetz KFetters MDDickert NWHaggins ANSpeight CDHarney DKfalseMeeting unique requirements: Community consultation and public disclosure for research in emergency setting using exception from informed consent.<h4>Background</h4>Exception from informed consent (EFIC) regulations for research in emergency settings contain unique requirements for community consultation and public disclosure. These requirements address ethical challenges intrinsic to this research context. Multiple approaches have evolved to accomplish these activities that may reflect and advance different aims. This scoping review was designed to identify areas of consensus and lingering uncertainty in the literature.<h4>Methods</h4>Scoping review methodology was used. Conceptual and empirical literature related to community consultation and public disclosure for EFIC research was included and identified through a structured search using Embase, HEIN Online, PubMed, and Web of Science. Data were extracted using a standardized tool with domains for major literature categories.<h4>Results</h4>Among 84 manuscripts, major domains included conceptual or policy issues, reports of community consultation processes and results, and reports of public disclosure processes and results. Areas of consensus related to community consultation included the need for a two-way exchange of information and use of multiple methods. Public acceptance of personal EFIC enrollment is commonly 64% to 85%. There is less consensus regarding how to assess attitudes, what "communities" to prioritize, and how to determine adequacy for individual projects. Core goals of public disclosure are less well developed; no metrics exist for assessing adequacy.<h4>Conclusions</h4>Multiple methods are used to meet community consultation and public disclosure requirements. There remain no settled norms for assessing adequacy of public disclosure, and there is lingering debate about needed breadth and depth of community consultation.2021-01-01T00:00:00Z2021 Oct2025-04-04T10:27:46.656Z2025-04-04T10:27:46.656ZS-EPMC85235873387242610.1111/acem.14264