Pub Date : 2022-02-01Epub Date: 2021-11-22DOI: 10.1177/15562646211056762
Mutshidzi A Mulondo, Joyce M Tsoka-Gwegweni, Puleng LenkaBula, Perpetual Chikobvu
Most capacity development efforts for research ethics committees focus on committee members and little on ethics administrators. Increasing studies mandate the focus on administrators' capacity development needs to enable adequate and effective committee support. This study investigated current responsibilities, training requirements, and administrator role needs. An online cross-sectional survey was conducted among administrators from 62 National Health Research Ethics Council-registered research ethics committees in South Africa. In total, 36 administrators completed the questionnaire. Results show that, in addition to administration, they perform managerial, review process and guidance-advisory tasks. Nearly 49% indicated only having received informal research ethics-related training, not targeted formal training, with 81% of the informal training being through workshops. Research ethics administrators' responsibilities have evolved to complex tasks requiring targeted capacity development efforts.
{"title":"A Survey to Determine the Capacity Development Needs of Research Ethics Committee Administrators in South Africa.","authors":"Mutshidzi A Mulondo, Joyce M Tsoka-Gwegweni, Puleng LenkaBula, Perpetual Chikobvu","doi":"10.1177/15562646211056762","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/15562646211056762","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Most capacity development efforts for research ethics committees focus on committee members and little on ethics administrators. Increasing studies mandate the focus on administrators' capacity development needs to enable adequate and effective committee support. This study investigated current responsibilities, training requirements, and administrator role needs. An online cross-sectional survey was conducted among administrators from 62 National Health Research Ethics Council-registered research ethics committees in South Africa. In total, 36 administrators completed the questionnaire. Results show that, in addition to administration, they perform managerial, review process and guidance-advisory tasks. Nearly 49% indicated only having received informal research ethics-related training, not targeted formal training, with 81% of the informal training being through workshops. Research ethics administrators' responsibilities have evolved to complex tasks requiring targeted capacity development efforts.</p>","PeriodicalId":50211,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Empirical Research on Human Research Ethics","volume":"17 1-2","pages":"84-93"},"PeriodicalIF":1.3,"publicationDate":"2022-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"39646036","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-02-01Epub Date: 2021-12-06DOI: 10.1177/15562646211060997
Laura B Dunn, Jane P Kim, Maryam Rostami, Sangeeta Mondal, Katie Ryan, Asees Waraich, Laura Weiss Roberts, Barton W Palmer
This study evaluated stakeholders' perspectives regarding participation in two hypothetical neuromodulation trials focused on individuals with Alzheimer's disease and related disorders (ADRDs). Stakeholders (i.e., individuals at risk for ADRDs [n = 56], individuals with experience as a caregiver for someone with a cognitive disorder [n = 60], and comparison respondents [n = 124]) were recruited via MTurk. Primary outcomes were willingness to enroll (or enroll one's loved one), feeling lucky to have the opportunity to enroll, and feeling obligated to enroll in two protocols (transcranial magnetic stimulation, TMS; deep brain stimulation, DBS). Relative to the Comparison group, the At Risk group endorsed higher levels of "feeling lucky" regarding both research protocols, and higher willingness to participate in the TMS protocol. These findings provide tentative reassurance regarding the nature of decision making regarding neurotechnology-based research on ADRDs. Further work is needed to evaluate the full range of potential influences on research participation.
{"title":"Stakeholders' Perspectives regarding Participation in Neuromodulation-Based Dementia Intervention Research.","authors":"Laura B Dunn, Jane P Kim, Maryam Rostami, Sangeeta Mondal, Katie Ryan, Asees Waraich, Laura Weiss Roberts, Barton W Palmer","doi":"10.1177/15562646211060997","DOIUrl":"10.1177/15562646211060997","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>This study evaluated stakeholders' perspectives regarding participation in two hypothetical neuromodulation trials focused on individuals with Alzheimer's disease and related disorders (ADRDs). Stakeholders (i.e., individuals at risk for ADRDs [<i>n</i> = 56], individuals with experience as a caregiver for someone with a cognitive disorder [<i>n</i> = 60], and comparison respondents [<i>n</i> = 124]) were recruited via MTurk. Primary outcomes were willingness to enroll (or enroll one's loved one), feeling lucky to have the opportunity to enroll, and feeling obligated to enroll in two protocols (transcranial magnetic stimulation, TMS; deep brain stimulation, DBS). Relative to the Comparison group, the At Risk group endorsed higher levels of \"feeling lucky\" regarding both research protocols, and higher willingness to participate in the TMS protocol. These findings provide tentative reassurance regarding the nature of decision making regarding neurotechnology-based research on ADRDs. Further work is needed to evaluate the full range of potential influences on research participation.</p>","PeriodicalId":50211,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Empirical Research on Human Research Ethics","volume":"17 1-2","pages":"29-38"},"PeriodicalIF":1.3,"publicationDate":"2022-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9631956/pdf/nihms-1753604.pdf","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"39696080","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-02-01Epub Date: 2021-10-12DOI: 10.1177/15562646211048268
Anna M Scott, E Ann Bryant, Jennifer A Byrne, Natalie Taylor, Adrian G Barnett
We created a petition for a national inquiry into the Australian system of research ethics and governance, to inform the politicians about the problems with the existing system. We analyzed the reasons that signatories offered for why signing the petition was important to them. A total of 409 comments (by 805 signatories) focused on five major themes: (1) views on previous changes to the system of research ethics and governance; (2) drawbacks of the existing system; (3) suggested changes to the system; (4) anticipated impacts of changing the system; and (5) miscellaneous/other comments. Comments ranged from several words to over 400 words in length, and most often focused on the procedural aspects, and commented on theme 2: drawbacks of the existing system.
{"title":"\"No Country Bureaucratised its way to Excellence\": A Content Analysis of Comments on a Petition to Streamline Australian Research Ethics and Governance Processes.","authors":"Anna M Scott, E Ann Bryant, Jennifer A Byrne, Natalie Taylor, Adrian G Barnett","doi":"10.1177/15562646211048268","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/15562646211048268","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>We created a petition for a national inquiry into the Australian system of research ethics and governance, to inform the politicians about the problems with the existing system. We analyzed the reasons that signatories offered for why signing the petition was important to them. A total of 409 comments (by 805 signatories) focused on five major themes: (1) views on previous changes to the system of research ethics and governance; (2) drawbacks of the existing system; (3) suggested changes to the system; (4) anticipated impacts of changing the system; and (5) miscellaneous/other comments. Comments ranged from several words to over 400 words in length, and most often focused on the procedural aspects, and commented on theme 2: drawbacks of the existing system.</p>","PeriodicalId":50211,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Empirical Research on Human Research Ethics","volume":"17 1-2","pages":"102-113"},"PeriodicalIF":1.3,"publicationDate":"2022-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"39510075","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-02-01Epub Date: 2021-10-14DOI: 10.1177/15562646211047654
Minna Stolt, Emilia Kielo-Viljamaa, Anne-Marie Laitinen, Riitta Suhonen, Helena Leino-Kilpi
Research ethics is a fundamental part of the entire research. Patients with rheumatoid arthritis are sensitive group of research participants because their long-term health problems cause significant changes in their foot health. In foot health research, data are usually collected through a clinical assessment of the foot or questionnaires. However, there is limited evidence of the reported research ethics of empirical studies on foot health in patients with rheumatoid arthritis. Therefore this review aimed to analyze the reported research ethics of peer-reviewed empirical studies focusing on foot health in patients with rheumatoid arthritis as research participants. This systematic review used the Medline/PubMed, CINAHL, and Embase databases. A total of 1,653 records were identified, and 32 articles were included in the final analysis. Reporting research ethics in studies of patients with rheumatoid arthritis is fragmented, focusing predominantly on ethical approval and informed consent and lacking a broader discussion about research ethics.
{"title":"Reporting of Research Ethics in Studies Focusing on Foot Health in Patients with Rheumatoid Arthritis - A Systematic Review.","authors":"Minna Stolt, Emilia Kielo-Viljamaa, Anne-Marie Laitinen, Riitta Suhonen, Helena Leino-Kilpi","doi":"10.1177/15562646211047654","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/15562646211047654","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Research ethics is a fundamental part of the entire research. Patients with rheumatoid arthritis are sensitive group of research participants because their long-term health problems cause significant changes in their foot health. In foot health research, data are usually collected through a clinical assessment of the foot or questionnaires. However, there is limited evidence of the reported research ethics of empirical studies on foot health in patients with rheumatoid arthritis. Therefore this review aimed to analyze the reported research ethics of peer-reviewed empirical studies focusing on foot health in patients with rheumatoid arthritis as research participants. This systematic review used the Medline/PubMed, CINAHL, and Embase databases. A total of 1,653 records were identified, and 32 articles were included in the final analysis. Reporting research ethics in studies of patients with rheumatoid arthritis is fragmented, focusing predominantly on ethical approval and informed consent and lacking a broader discussion about research ethics.</p>","PeriodicalId":50211,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Empirical Research on Human Research Ethics","volume":"17 1-2","pages":"39-51"},"PeriodicalIF":1.3,"publicationDate":"2022-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8721538/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"39516556","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-02-01Epub Date: 2021-10-19DOI: 10.1177/15562646211051189
Samuel Asiedu Owusu, Grace Addison, Barbara Redman, Lisa Kearns, Paul Amuna, Amos Laar
There were eighteen Research Ethics Committees (RECs) operating in Ghana as of December 2019 but no empirical assessment of their operational characteristics had been conducted. We assessed the characteristics of Ghanaian RECs using an existing Self-Assessment Tool for RECs in Developing Countries. We present results from nine RECs that participated in this nation-wide assessment. Our results indicate that the RECs are generally adherent to the recommendations in the Tool including being composed of members with diverse expertise. They also reviewed and approved research protocols as well as had access to some limited funding for their activities. There is no national policy on research human protections or an ethics authority to regulate the activities of the RECs. We recommend the establishment of this authority in Ghana while encouraging institutions to sustain efforts aimed at making their RECs operate independently.
{"title":"Assessment of the Operational Characteristics of Research Ethics Committees in Ghana.","authors":"Samuel Asiedu Owusu, Grace Addison, Barbara Redman, Lisa Kearns, Paul Amuna, Amos Laar","doi":"10.1177/15562646211051189","DOIUrl":"10.1177/15562646211051189","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>There were eighteen Research Ethics Committees (RECs) operating in Ghana as of December 2019 but no empirical assessment of their operational characteristics had been conducted. We assessed the characteristics of Ghanaian RECs using an existing Self-Assessment Tool for RECs in Developing Countries. We present results from nine RECs that participated in this nation-wide assessment. Our results indicate that the RECs are generally adherent to the recommendations in the Tool including being composed of members with diverse expertise. They also reviewed and approved research protocols as well as had access to some limited funding for their activities. There is no national policy on research human protections or an ethics authority to regulate the activities of the RECs. We recommend the establishment of this authority in Ghana while encouraging institutions to sustain efforts aimed at making their RECs operate independently.</p>","PeriodicalId":50211,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Empirical Research on Human Research Ethics","volume":"17 1-2","pages":"114-128"},"PeriodicalIF":1.7,"publicationDate":"2022-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8712386/pdf/nihms-1741794.pdf","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"39532251","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-02-01Epub Date: 2021-08-20DOI: 10.1177/15562646211034275
Ji-Hye Seo, Ock-Joo Kim, Sang-Ho Yoo, Eun Kyung Choi, Ji-Eun Park
The phase I trial is the first step in administering a drug to humans, but it has no therapeutic purpose. Under the absence of therapeutic purpose, healthy volunteers demonstrated different motivations, unlike the actual patients participating in trials. There were many reported motivations, such as financial motivation, contributing to the health science, accessing ancillary health care benefits, scientific interest or interest in the goals of the study, meeting people, and general curiosity. The aim of this study was to identify the motivation and characteristics of healthy volunteers participating in phase I trials in the Republic of Korea. We gave surveys to 121 healthy volunteers to study their demographic characteristics and the reasons of participation. We identified whether the decision to participate in the research was influenced by demographic factors and whether the perception and attitudes toward the research were influenced by the characteristics of the healthy volunteers. After completion of the first survey, 12 healthy volunteers who had participated in a phase I clinical trial were selected to answer the second interview. According to our survey, most healthy volunteers were unmarried men and economically dependent. Most of them participated in the study because of financial reward. The most important factor to measure financial reward was the research period. Also, 43% of the volunteers were university students, 42% answered "university graduation" and 55% were residing in family-owned houses. Many healthy volunteers were found to be living in family homes and to have a student status or lack of economic independence. Results of the survey showed that 64% of respondents indicated having more than one clinical trial participation. In-depth interviews showed that healthy volunteers had diverse motivation to participate in research and that healthy volunteer perceive the clinical trial positively. The main motivation for healthy volunteers' participation in research was "financial reward." Healthy volunteers also considered research schedules, processes, and safety, and had a positive perception of clinical trials, but they thought that the public has a negative perception.
{"title":"A Study on the Characteristics of Healthy Volunteers who Participate in Phase I Clinical Trials in Korea.","authors":"Ji-Hye Seo, Ock-Joo Kim, Sang-Ho Yoo, Eun Kyung Choi, Ji-Eun Park","doi":"10.1177/15562646211034275","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/15562646211034275","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The phase I trial is the first step in administering a drug to humans, but it has no therapeutic purpose. Under the absence of therapeutic purpose, healthy volunteers demonstrated different motivations, unlike the actual patients participating in trials. There were many reported motivations, such as financial motivation, contributing to the health science, accessing ancillary health care benefits, scientific interest or interest in the goals of the study, meeting people, and general curiosity. The aim of this study was to identify the motivation and characteristics of healthy volunteers participating in phase I trials in the Republic of Korea. We gave surveys to 121 healthy volunteers to study their demographic characteristics and the reasons of participation. We identified whether the decision to participate in the research was influenced by demographic factors and whether the perception and attitudes toward the research were influenced by the characteristics of the healthy volunteers. After completion of the first survey, 12 healthy volunteers who had participated in a phase I clinical trial were selected to answer the second interview. According to our survey, most healthy volunteers were unmarried men and economically dependent. Most of them participated in the study because of financial reward. The most important factor to measure financial reward was the research period. Also, 43% of the volunteers were university students, 42% answered \"university graduation\" and 55% were residing in family-owned houses. Many healthy volunteers were found to be living in family homes and to have a student status or lack of economic independence. Results of the survey showed that 64% of respondents indicated having more than one clinical trial participation. In-depth interviews showed that healthy volunteers had diverse motivation to participate in research and that healthy volunteer perceive the clinical trial positively. The main motivation for healthy volunteers' participation in research was \"financial reward.\" Healthy volunteers also considered research schedules, processes, and safety, and had a positive perception of clinical trials, but they thought that the public has a negative perception.</p>","PeriodicalId":50211,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Empirical Research on Human Research Ethics","volume":"17 1-2","pages":"193-212"},"PeriodicalIF":1.3,"publicationDate":"2022-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"39328960","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-02-01Epub Date: 2021-11-22DOI: 10.1177/15562646211053234
Linda Kateb, Sawsan El-Jayousi, Maysa Al-Hussaini
The problem: Running an efficient institutional review board (IRB) can be challenging. The research subjects: To ensure an efficient committee, our IRB adopted several operational metrics. Methods: Analysis of retrospective data from the IRB records, database, and annual reports over 12 years. Results: The IRB roster comprises 11 members. The average medical to nonmedical member ratio is 5:6, and the male to female ratio is 4:7, which has not been consistent over the years. One thousand three hundred and twenty-four proposals were reviewed including 1077 exempt (81.3%), 126 expedited (9.5%), and 121 full board (9.2%) with a median turnaround time to approval of 4.0, 35.0, and 68.0 days, respectively. Training of the IRB members was conducted to enhance their knowledge and skills. IRB at King Hussein Cancer Center has managed to stay abreast and efficient during the COVID-19 pandemic, by working remotely. Conclusion: Running an efficient IRB mandates implementing a number of operational metrics.
{"title":"An Overview of King Hussein Cancer Center Institutional Review Board Over 12 Years (2009-2020), Successes and Challenges, Including Those Imposed by the COVID-19 Pandemic.","authors":"Linda Kateb, Sawsan El-Jayousi, Maysa Al-Hussaini","doi":"10.1177/15562646211053234","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/15562646211053234","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p><i>The problem</i>: Running an efficient institutional review board (IRB) can be challenging. <i>The research subjects</i>: To ensure an efficient committee, our IRB adopted several operational metrics. <i>Methods</i>: Analysis of retrospective data from the IRB records, database, and annual reports over 12 years. <i>Results</i>: The IRB roster comprises 11 members. The average medical to nonmedical member ratio is 5:6, and the male to female ratio is 4:7, which has not been consistent over the years. One thousand three hundred and twenty-four proposals were reviewed including 1077 exempt (81.3%), 126 expedited (9.5%), and 121 full board (9.2%) with a median turnaround time to approval of 4.0, 35.0, and 68.0 days, respectively. Training of the IRB members was conducted to enhance their knowledge and skills. IRB at King Hussein Cancer Center has managed to stay abreast and efficient during the COVID-19 pandemic, by working remotely. <i>Conclusion</i>: Running an efficient IRB mandates implementing a number of operational metrics.</p>","PeriodicalId":50211,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Empirical Research on Human Research Ethics","volume":"17 1-2","pages":"94-101"},"PeriodicalIF":1.3,"publicationDate":"2022-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"39646038","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-02-01Epub Date: 2021-10-12DOI: 10.1177/15562646211048294
Stephanie Taplin, Jenny Chalmers, Judith Brown, Tim Moore, Anne Graham, Morag McArthur
As part of a larger study, Australian Human Research Ethics Committee (HREC) members and managers were surveyed about their decision-making and views about social research studies with child participants. Responses of 229 HREC members and 42 HREC managers are reported. While most HREC members had received ethical training, HREC training and guidelines specific to research involving children were rare. Most applications involving children had to go through a full ethical review, but few adverse events were reported to HRECs regarding the conduct of the studies. Revisions to study proposals requested by HRECs were mostly related to consent processes and age-appropriate language. One-third of HREC members said that they would approve research on any topic. Most were also concerned that the methodology was appropriate, and the risks and benefits were clearly articulated. Specific training and guidance are needed to increase HREC members' confidence to judge ethical research with children.
{"title":"Human Research Ethics Committee Experiences and Views About Children's Participation in Research: Results From the <i>MESSI</i> Study.","authors":"Stephanie Taplin, Jenny Chalmers, Judith Brown, Tim Moore, Anne Graham, Morag McArthur","doi":"10.1177/15562646211048294","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/15562646211048294","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>As part of a larger study, Australian Human Research Ethics Committee (HREC) members and managers were surveyed about their decision-making and views about social research studies with child participants. Responses of 229 HREC members and 42 HREC managers are reported. While most HREC members had received ethical training, HREC training and guidelines specific to research involving children were rare. Most applications involving children had to go through a full ethical review, but few adverse events were reported to HRECs regarding the conduct of the studies. Revisions to study proposals requested by HRECs were mostly related to consent processes and age-appropriate language. One-third of HREC members said that they would approve research on any topic. Most were also concerned that the methodology was appropriate, and the risks and benefits were clearly articulated. Specific training and guidance are needed to increase HREC members' confidence to judge ethical research with children.</p>","PeriodicalId":50211,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Empirical Research on Human Research Ethics","volume":"17 1-2","pages":"70-83"},"PeriodicalIF":1.3,"publicationDate":"2022-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"39510072","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-02-01Epub Date: 2021-12-06DOI: 10.1177/15562646211062707
Andrea R Kaniuka, Meagan Zarwell, Robert J Cramer, Katherine Quinn, Michelle Broaddus, Alexandra Patton, Jennifer L Walsh
Human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) continues to disproportionately affect gay, bisexual, and other men who have sex with men (GBM) and transgender and nonbinary (trans/NB) individuals. This study investigated attitudes toward participation in HIV survey research, guided by Emanuel's framework for ethical clinical research (e.g., risk-benefit ratio, fair participant selection, respect for participants, social value, and collaborative partnership). GBM (n = 294) and trans/NB (n = 86) persons recruited at a Pride event in Milwaukee completed a survey assessing risks and benefits of participation in, and comfort responding to, sexual health surveys. Participants reported few ethical concerns (e.g., privacy and confidentiality), with notable differences by race, sexual orientation and gender identity, and prior research experiences. Implications for HIV research with GBM and trans/NB individuals are discussed.
人类免疫缺陷病毒(HIV)对男同性恋、双性恋和其他男男性行为者(GBM)以及变性人和非二元性(trans/NB)个体的影响仍然不成比例。本研究以伊曼纽尔临床研究伦理框架为指导(如风险收益比、公平选择参与者、尊重参与者、社会价值和协作伙伴关系),调查了人们对参与 HIV 调查研究的态度。在密尔沃基的一次骄傲活动中招募的 GBM(n = 294)和变性人/NB(n = 86)完成了一项调查,评估了参与性健康调查的风险和益处,以及回答性健康调查的舒适度。参与者报告的道德问题(如隐私和保密性)很少,不同种族、性取向和性别认同以及先前的研究经历之间存在明显差异。本文讨论了对 GBM 和变性/NB 人进行 HIV 研究的意义。
{"title":"Perceptions of HIV Research Participation Among Gay, Bisexual, and Other Men who Have Sex with Men and Transgender and Nonbinary Adults: Results From a Midwest Pride Event.","authors":"Andrea R Kaniuka, Meagan Zarwell, Robert J Cramer, Katherine Quinn, Michelle Broaddus, Alexandra Patton, Jennifer L Walsh","doi":"10.1177/15562646211062707","DOIUrl":"10.1177/15562646211062707","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) continues to disproportionately affect gay, bisexual, and other men who have sex with men (GBM) and transgender and nonbinary (trans/NB) individuals. This study investigated attitudes toward participation in HIV survey research, guided by Emanuel's framework for ethical clinical research (e.g., risk-benefit ratio, fair participant selection, respect for participants, social value, and collaborative partnership). GBM (<i>n</i> = 294) and trans/NB (<i>n</i> = 86) persons recruited at a Pride event in Milwaukee completed a survey assessing risks and benefits of participation in, and comfort responding to, sexual health surveys. Participants reported few ethical concerns (e.g., privacy and confidentiality), with notable differences by race, sexual orientation and gender identity, and prior research experiences. Implications for HIV research with GBM and trans/NB individuals are discussed.</p>","PeriodicalId":50211,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Empirical Research on Human Research Ethics","volume":"17 1-2","pages":"15-28"},"PeriodicalIF":1.7,"publicationDate":"2022-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11639097/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"39946429","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-02-01Epub Date: 2021-08-19DOI: 10.1177/15562646211037546
Erin D Solomon, Jessica Mozersky, Matthew P Wroblewski, Kari Baldwin, Meredith V Parsons, Melody Goodman, James M DuBois
Recent revisions to the Common Rule require that consent documents begin with a focused presentation of the study's key information that is organized to facilitate understanding. We surveyed 1,284 researchers working with older adults or individuals with Alzheimer's disease, supplemented with 60 qualitative interviews, to understand current use and barriers to using evidence-based formatting and plain language in key information. Researchers reported using formatting in 42% of their key information sections, and plain language in 63% of their key information sections. Perceived barriers included lack of knowledge, Institutional Review Board, other members of their team, and the burden associated with implementation. Education and training are required to increase adoption of the practices.
{"title":"Understanding the Use of Optimal Formatting and Plain Language When Presenting Key Information in Clinical Trials.","authors":"Erin D Solomon, Jessica Mozersky, Matthew P Wroblewski, Kari Baldwin, Meredith V Parsons, Melody Goodman, James M DuBois","doi":"10.1177/15562646211037546","DOIUrl":"10.1177/15562646211037546","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Recent revisions to the Common Rule require that consent documents begin with a focused presentation of the study's key information that is organized to facilitate understanding. We surveyed 1,284 researchers working with older adults or individuals with Alzheimer's disease, supplemented with 60 qualitative interviews, to understand current use and barriers to using evidence-based formatting and plain language in key information. Researchers reported using formatting in 42% of their key information sections, and plain language in 63% of their key information sections. Perceived barriers included lack of knowledge, Institutional Review Board, other members of their team, and the burden associated with implementation. Education and training are required to increase adoption of the practices.</p>","PeriodicalId":50211,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Empirical Research on Human Research Ethics","volume":"17 1-2","pages":"177-192"},"PeriodicalIF":1.3,"publicationDate":"2022-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8712347/pdf/nihms-1726503.pdf","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"39326069","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}