将 "投资方 "纳入大规模临床研究的伦理考虑因素:来自 RECOVER 计划的启示

Q2 Social Sciences Ethics & human research Pub Date : 2024-09-15 DOI:10.1002/eahr.500221
Kellie Owens, Emily E. Anderson, Shari Esquenazi-Karonika, Keith Hanson, Maika Mitchell, Janelle Linton, Jasmine Briscoe, Leah Castro Baucom, Liza Fisher, Rebecca Letts, Kian Nguyen, Brendan Parent
{"title":"将 \"投资方 \"纳入大规模临床研究的伦理考虑因素:来自 RECOVER 计划的启示","authors":"Kellie Owens,&nbsp;Emily E. Anderson,&nbsp;Shari Esquenazi-Karonika,&nbsp;Keith Hanson,&nbsp;Maika Mitchell,&nbsp;Janelle Linton,&nbsp;Jasmine Briscoe,&nbsp;Leah Castro Baucom,&nbsp;Liza Fisher,&nbsp;Rebecca Letts,&nbsp;Kian Nguyen,&nbsp;Brendan Parent","doi":"10.1002/eahr.500221","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n <p>Research institutions often lack policies addressing the risks and benefits of enrolling “invested parties” such as investigators, research staff, and patient, caregiver, and community representatives (groups most affected by a disease or intervention) in studies where they have direct involvement. Invested parties may have both strong motivations to study the condition or intervention and to participate as study subjects. More guidance is needed to promote appropriate access to research participation and mitigate potential risks. This article addresses the gap in guidance by presenting an ethical framework and practical guidelines for the enrollment of invested parties. Drawing from experiences with the Researching COVID to Enhance Recovery (RECOVER) Initiative, a large multisite observational cohort study, we argue that invested parties should not be categorically excluded from enrollment in their own research studies if certain criteria are met and appropriate safeguards are in place. We underscore the need to balance inclusion with fairness, promote valid voluntary informed consent, ensure data privacy, protect scientific validity, and mitigate unique risks to invested parties as participants. Additionally, we recommend regular reporting and empirical assessment to evaluate the impact of enrolling invested parties on participants and study outcomes.</p>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":36829,"journal":{"name":"Ethics & human research","volume":"46 5","pages":"2-12"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/eahr.500221","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Ethical Considerations for Enrolling “Invested Parties” in Large-Scale Clinical Studies: Insights from the RECOVER Initiative\",\"authors\":\"Kellie Owens,&nbsp;Emily E. Anderson,&nbsp;Shari Esquenazi-Karonika,&nbsp;Keith Hanson,&nbsp;Maika Mitchell,&nbsp;Janelle Linton,&nbsp;Jasmine Briscoe,&nbsp;Leah Castro Baucom,&nbsp;Liza Fisher,&nbsp;Rebecca Letts,&nbsp;Kian Nguyen,&nbsp;Brendan Parent\",\"doi\":\"10.1002/eahr.500221\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div>\\n \\n <p>Research institutions often lack policies addressing the risks and benefits of enrolling “invested parties” such as investigators, research staff, and patient, caregiver, and community representatives (groups most affected by a disease or intervention) in studies where they have direct involvement. Invested parties may have both strong motivations to study the condition or intervention and to participate as study subjects. More guidance is needed to promote appropriate access to research participation and mitigate potential risks. This article addresses the gap in guidance by presenting an ethical framework and practical guidelines for the enrollment of invested parties. Drawing from experiences with the Researching COVID to Enhance Recovery (RECOVER) Initiative, a large multisite observational cohort study, we argue that invested parties should not be categorically excluded from enrollment in their own research studies if certain criteria are met and appropriate safeguards are in place. We underscore the need to balance inclusion with fairness, promote valid voluntary informed consent, ensure data privacy, protect scientific validity, and mitigate unique risks to invested parties as participants. Additionally, we recommend regular reporting and empirical assessment to evaluate the impact of enrolling invested parties on participants and study outcomes.</p>\\n </div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":36829,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Ethics & human research\",\"volume\":\"46 5\",\"pages\":\"2-12\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-09-15\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/eahr.500221\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Ethics & human research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/eahr.500221\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"Social Sciences\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Ethics & human research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/eahr.500221","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

研究机构往往缺乏相关政策来处理 "被投资方"(如研究人员、研究人员以及患者、护理人员和社区代表(受疾病或干预措施影响最大的群体))参与其直接参与的研究的风险和益处。被投资方可能既有研究疾病或干预措施的强烈动机,也有作为研究对象参与研究的强烈动机。我们需要更多指导,以促进研究参与的适当性并降低潜在风险。本文针对指导方面的不足,提出了一个伦理框架和投资方参与研究的实用指南。根据 "研究 COVID 以促进康复 (RECOVER) 计划"(一项大型多地点观察性队列研究)的经验,我们认为,如果符合某些标准并采取了适当的保障措施,就不应将被投资方明确排除在自己的研究项目之外。我们强调有必要在包容性与公平性之间取得平衡,促进有效的自愿知情同意,确保数据隐私,保护科学有效性,并降低被投资方作为参与者所面临的独特风险。此外,我们建议定期进行报告和实证评估,以评估纳入被投资方对参与者和研究结果的影响。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Ethical Considerations for Enrolling “Invested Parties” in Large-Scale Clinical Studies: Insights from the RECOVER Initiative

Research institutions often lack policies addressing the risks and benefits of enrolling “invested parties” such as investigators, research staff, and patient, caregiver, and community representatives (groups most affected by a disease or intervention) in studies where they have direct involvement. Invested parties may have both strong motivations to study the condition or intervention and to participate as study subjects. More guidance is needed to promote appropriate access to research participation and mitigate potential risks. This article addresses the gap in guidance by presenting an ethical framework and practical guidelines for the enrollment of invested parties. Drawing from experiences with the Researching COVID to Enhance Recovery (RECOVER) Initiative, a large multisite observational cohort study, we argue that invested parties should not be categorically excluded from enrollment in their own research studies if certain criteria are met and appropriate safeguards are in place. We underscore the need to balance inclusion with fairness, promote valid voluntary informed consent, ensure data privacy, protect scientific validity, and mitigate unique risks to invested parties as participants. Additionally, we recommend regular reporting and empirical assessment to evaluate the impact of enrolling invested parties on participants and study outcomes.

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
Ethics & human research
Ethics & human research Social Sciences-Health (social science)
CiteScore
2.90
自引率
0.00%
发文量
35
期刊最新文献
Issue Information The Prospect of Artificial Intelligence-Supported Ethics Review Ethical Issues Faced by Data Monitoring Committees: Results from an Exploratory Qualitative Study The Ethical Case for Decentralized Clinical Trials The European Health Data Space as a Case Study
×
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