埃塞俄比亚阿姆哈拉地区国家结核病分枝杆菌和宿主遗传研究的快速生物伦理评估:朝着特定环境的伦理方法。

IF 1.5 Q3 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES Ethiopian Journal of Health Sciences Pub Date : 2023-05-01 DOI:10.4314/ejhs.v33i3.4
Daniel Mekonnen, Abaineh Munshea, Endalkachew Nibret, Awoke Derbie, Mastewal Wubetu, Mengistie Taye, Taye Zeru, Belay Bezabih, Muluken Azage, Kidist Bobosha, Abraham Aseffa
{"title":"埃塞俄比亚阿姆哈拉地区国家结核病分枝杆菌和宿主遗传研究的快速生物伦理评估:朝着特定环境的伦理方法。","authors":"Daniel Mekonnen,&nbsp;Abaineh Munshea,&nbsp;Endalkachew Nibret,&nbsp;Awoke Derbie,&nbsp;Mastewal Wubetu,&nbsp;Mengistie Taye,&nbsp;Taye Zeru,&nbsp;Belay Bezabih,&nbsp;Muluken Azage,&nbsp;Kidist Bobosha,&nbsp;Abraham Aseffa","doi":"10.4314/ejhs.v33i3.4","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Rapid Ethical Assessment (REA) is a rapid qualitative study anticipated to understand the ethical sphere of the research setting prior to recruiting study subjects. This study assessed the communities' knowledge about tuberculosis (TB) and research, understand the social arrangements advisable for recruiting research participant and appraised the information provision and consent process.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The study was conducted in Amhara region, Ethiopia from 5<sup>th</sup>-30<sup>th</sup> January 2021. Google-based survey, face-to-face in-depth interview and focus group discussion were carried out to collect the data from researchers, data collectors, health professionals, TB program officers. A structured questionnaire was administered to assess the knowledge of TB patients and healthy controls about TB, research, gene, (co)evolution and consent process.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Over 71% of researchers were not satisfied with the current consent process, and 82.7% of researchers agreed that the best interest of the research participants was not adequately addressed in the current research practices in ANRS. TB patients and healthy controls misunderstood research and its goals. Participants advised the researchers to approach the community with the assistance of health extension workers (HEW) or religious/local leaders. Combined use of verbal and written based information provision at individual participant level is the preferred way for information provision.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The adherence of researchers to standard information provision and consent process was very low. Healthy controls and TB patients have low level of knowledge and awareness about research, ethics and genomic research-related common terms. Hence, public education is required to strengthen the research ethics in the region.</p>","PeriodicalId":12003,"journal":{"name":"Ethiopian Journal of Health Sciences","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2023-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10416330/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Rapid Bioethical Assessment for <i>Mycobacterium tuberculosis</i> and Host Genetic Study in Amhara Regional State, Ethiopia: Towards a Context-Specific Ethical Approach.\",\"authors\":\"Daniel Mekonnen,&nbsp;Abaineh Munshea,&nbsp;Endalkachew Nibret,&nbsp;Awoke Derbie,&nbsp;Mastewal Wubetu,&nbsp;Mengistie Taye,&nbsp;Taye Zeru,&nbsp;Belay Bezabih,&nbsp;Muluken Azage,&nbsp;Kidist Bobosha,&nbsp;Abraham Aseffa\",\"doi\":\"10.4314/ejhs.v33i3.4\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Rapid Ethical Assessment (REA) is a rapid qualitative study anticipated to understand the ethical sphere of the research setting prior to recruiting study subjects. This study assessed the communities' knowledge about tuberculosis (TB) and research, understand the social arrangements advisable for recruiting research participant and appraised the information provision and consent process.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The study was conducted in Amhara region, Ethiopia from 5<sup>th</sup>-30<sup>th</sup> January 2021. Google-based survey, face-to-face in-depth interview and focus group discussion were carried out to collect the data from researchers, data collectors, health professionals, TB program officers. A structured questionnaire was administered to assess the knowledge of TB patients and healthy controls about TB, research, gene, (co)evolution and consent process.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Over 71% of researchers were not satisfied with the current consent process, and 82.7% of researchers agreed that the best interest of the research participants was not adequately addressed in the current research practices in ANRS. TB patients and healthy controls misunderstood research and its goals. Participants advised the researchers to approach the community with the assistance of health extension workers (HEW) or religious/local leaders. Combined use of verbal and written based information provision at individual participant level is the preferred way for information provision.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The adherence of researchers to standard information provision and consent process was very low. Healthy controls and TB patients have low level of knowledge and awareness about research, ethics and genomic research-related common terms. Hence, public education is required to strengthen the research ethics in the region.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":12003,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Ethiopian Journal of Health Sciences\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-05-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10416330/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Ethiopian Journal of Health Sciences\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.4314/ejhs.v33i3.4\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Ethiopian Journal of Health Sciences","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4314/ejhs.v33i3.4","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:快速伦理评估(REA)是一项快速定性研究,旨在在招募研究对象之前了解研究环境的伦理领域。本研究评估了社区对结核病和研究的知识,了解招募研究参与者的社会安排,并评估了信息提供和同意过程。方法:研究于2021年1月5日至30日在埃塞俄比亚阿姆哈拉地区进行。通过谷歌调查、面对面深度访谈和焦点小组讨论,收集研究人员、数据收集者、卫生专业人员、结核病项目官员的数据。通过一份结构化问卷来评估结核病患者和健康对照者对结核病、研究、基因、(共同)进化和同意过程的了解。结果:超过71%的研究人员对目前的同意流程不满意,82.7%的研究人员认为,在ANRS目前的研究实践中,研究参与者的最大利益没有得到充分的解决。结核病患者和健康对照者误解了研究及其目标。与会者建议研究人员在卫生推广工作者(HEW)或宗教/地方领袖的帮助下与社区接触。在个体参与者层面结合使用基于口头和书面的信息提供是信息提供的首选方式。结论:研究人员对标准信息提供和同意过程的依从性非常低。健康对照者和结核病患者对研究、伦理和基因组研究相关常用术语的知识和意识水平较低。因此,需要公共教育来加强该地区的研究伦理。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

摘要图片

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Rapid Bioethical Assessment for Mycobacterium tuberculosis and Host Genetic Study in Amhara Regional State, Ethiopia: Towards a Context-Specific Ethical Approach.

Background: Rapid Ethical Assessment (REA) is a rapid qualitative study anticipated to understand the ethical sphere of the research setting prior to recruiting study subjects. This study assessed the communities' knowledge about tuberculosis (TB) and research, understand the social arrangements advisable for recruiting research participant and appraised the information provision and consent process.

Methods: The study was conducted in Amhara region, Ethiopia from 5th-30th January 2021. Google-based survey, face-to-face in-depth interview and focus group discussion were carried out to collect the data from researchers, data collectors, health professionals, TB program officers. A structured questionnaire was administered to assess the knowledge of TB patients and healthy controls about TB, research, gene, (co)evolution and consent process.

Results: Over 71% of researchers were not satisfied with the current consent process, and 82.7% of researchers agreed that the best interest of the research participants was not adequately addressed in the current research practices in ANRS. TB patients and healthy controls misunderstood research and its goals. Participants advised the researchers to approach the community with the assistance of health extension workers (HEW) or religious/local leaders. Combined use of verbal and written based information provision at individual participant level is the preferred way for information provision.

Conclusions: The adherence of researchers to standard information provision and consent process was very low. Healthy controls and TB patients have low level of knowledge and awareness about research, ethics and genomic research-related common terms. Hence, public education is required to strengthen the research ethics in the region.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Ethiopian Journal of Health Sciences
Ethiopian Journal of Health Sciences HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES-
CiteScore
2.10
自引率
8.30%
发文量
137
审稿时长
12 weeks
期刊介绍: Ethiopian Journal of Health Sciences is a general health science journal addressing clinical medicine, public health and biomedical sciences. Rarely, it covers veterinary medicine
期刊最新文献
The Relationship between Weight Bias Internalization and Quality of Life among Overweight and Obese Youths in Thailand Prevalence and Associated Factors of Unplanned Re-Laparatomy after Non-Trauma Emergency Laparatomy in Resource-Limited Settings, 2023: A Retrospective Chart Review Ureterocoele Complicated By Cystolithiasis in a 23-Year-Old: A Case Report Breaking the barriers for conducting clinical trials in Africa: A need for higher commitment and collaborations Geo-Mapping of Intestinal Parasitic Infection in a Southern Community in Nigeria
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1