数据监控委员会面临的伦理问题:一项探索性定性研究的结果。

Q2 Social Sciences Ethics & human research Pub Date : 2024-11-13 DOI:10.1002/eahr.500227
Seema K. Shah, Akram Ibrahim, Alex Hinga, Diego Vintimilla, Mickayla Jones, Annette Rid, Lisa Eckstein, Dorcas Kamuya
{"title":"数据监控委员会面临的伦理问题:一项探索性定性研究的结果。","authors":"Seema K. Shah,&nbsp;Akram Ibrahim,&nbsp;Alex Hinga,&nbsp;Diego Vintimilla,&nbsp;Mickayla Jones,&nbsp;Annette Rid,&nbsp;Lisa Eckstein,&nbsp;Dorcas Kamuya","doi":"10.1002/eahr.500227","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n <p>To protect research participants and ensure scientific integrity in clinical trials, independent data monitoring committees (DMCs, also known as data and safety monitoring boards) increasingly oversee randomized clinical trials and recommend modifying or stopping research. Little is known about the ethical issues DMCs face. We conducted semistructured interviews of DMC members using a qualitative description approach with low-inference interpretation. We recruited respondents through consultation with experts, an online registry of DMC members, and snowball sampling. We interviewed 22 DMC members who were statisticians, clinicians, and/or ethicists that had overseen a wide variety of trials globally. We identified three themes: finding common ground on responsibilities with variation; the need for judgment but not necessarily ethics expertise; and the resulting emotional distress from navigating ethical challenges. In the first case, DMC members identified 19 distinct duties, with some ethical responsibilities rarely mentioned. In the second case, not all DMC members saw the need for ethicists on DMCs or ethics training. In the third case, ethical challenges sometimes led to strong negative emotions. Developing tailored ethics training and decision-making procedures may help DMCs respond more effectively to ethical challenges.</p>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":36829,"journal":{"name":"Ethics & human research","volume":"46 6","pages":"2-13"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/eahr.500227","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Ethical Issues Faced by Data Monitoring Committees: Results from an Exploratory Qualitative Study\",\"authors\":\"Seema K. Shah,&nbsp;Akram Ibrahim,&nbsp;Alex Hinga,&nbsp;Diego Vintimilla,&nbsp;Mickayla Jones,&nbsp;Annette Rid,&nbsp;Lisa Eckstein,&nbsp;Dorcas Kamuya\",\"doi\":\"10.1002/eahr.500227\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div>\\n \\n <p>To protect research participants and ensure scientific integrity in clinical trials, independent data monitoring committees (DMCs, also known as data and safety monitoring boards) increasingly oversee randomized clinical trials and recommend modifying or stopping research. Little is known about the ethical issues DMCs face. We conducted semistructured interviews of DMC members using a qualitative description approach with low-inference interpretation. We recruited respondents through consultation with experts, an online registry of DMC members, and snowball sampling. We interviewed 22 DMC members who were statisticians, clinicians, and/or ethicists that had overseen a wide variety of trials globally. We identified three themes: finding common ground on responsibilities with variation; the need for judgment but not necessarily ethics expertise; and the resulting emotional distress from navigating ethical challenges. In the first case, DMC members identified 19 distinct duties, with some ethical responsibilities rarely mentioned. In the second case, not all DMC members saw the need for ethicists on DMCs or ethics training. In the third case, ethical challenges sometimes led to strong negative emotions. Developing tailored ethics training and decision-making procedures may help DMCs respond more effectively to ethical challenges.</p>\\n </div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":36829,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Ethics & human research\",\"volume\":\"46 6\",\"pages\":\"2-13\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-11-13\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/eahr.500227\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Ethics & human research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/eahr.500227\",\"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.500227","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

为了保护研究参与者并确保临床试验的科学完整性,独立的数据监控委员会(DMC,又称数据与安全监控委员会)越来越多地监督随机临床试验,并建议修改或停止研究。人们对 DMC 面临的伦理问题知之甚少。我们采用低推理解释的定性描述方法对 DMC 成员进行了半结构化访谈。我们通过咨询专家、DMC 成员在线登记和滚雪球抽样等方式招募受访者。我们采访了 22 位 DMC 成员,他们是统计学家、临床医生和/或伦理学家,在全球范围内监督过各种试验。我们发现了三个主题:在不同的责任中找到共同点;需要判断力,但不一定需要伦理专业知识;以及在应对伦理挑战时产生的情绪困扰。在第一种情况下,DMC 成员确定了 19 项不同的职责,其中一些伦理责任很少被提及。在第二种情况下,并非所有区管委会成员都认为区管委会需要伦理学家或伦理培训。在第三个案例中,伦理挑战有时会导致强烈的负面情绪。制定有针对性的伦理培训和决策程序可以帮助 DMC 更有效地应对伦理挑战。
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 Issues Faced by Data Monitoring Committees: Results from an Exploratory Qualitative Study

To protect research participants and ensure scientific integrity in clinical trials, independent data monitoring committees (DMCs, also known as data and safety monitoring boards) increasingly oversee randomized clinical trials and recommend modifying or stopping research. Little is known about the ethical issues DMCs face. We conducted semistructured interviews of DMC members using a qualitative description approach with low-inference interpretation. We recruited respondents through consultation with experts, an online registry of DMC members, and snowball sampling. We interviewed 22 DMC members who were statisticians, clinicians, and/or ethicists that had overseen a wide variety of trials globally. We identified three themes: finding common ground on responsibilities with variation; the need for judgment but not necessarily ethics expertise; and the resulting emotional distress from navigating ethical challenges. In the first case, DMC members identified 19 distinct duties, with some ethical responsibilities rarely mentioned. In the second case, not all DMC members saw the need for ethicists on DMCs or ethics training. In the third case, ethical challenges sometimes led to strong negative emotions. Developing tailored ethics training and decision-making procedures may help DMCs respond more effectively to ethical challenges.

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