Shah Seema, Whittle Amy, Wilfond Benjamin, Gensler Gary, Wendler David
Department of Clinical Bioethics, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Md 20892, USA.
JAMA. 2004 Jan 28;291(4):476-82. doi: 10.1001/jama.291.4.476.
Federal regulations allow children in the United States to be enrolled in clinical research only when the institutional review board (IRB) determines that the risks are minimal or a minor increase over minimal, or that the research offers a prospect of direct benefit. Despite this reliance on IRBs, no data exist on how IRBs apply the risk and benefit categories for pediatric research.
To determine how IRB chairpersons apply the federal risk and benefit categories for pediatric research.
DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Telephone survey, conducted between May and August 2002 of 188 randomly selected chairpersons of IRBs in the Unites States. The survey consisted of 21 questions to assess the application of federal risk standards to research procedures, whether certain interventions offer a prospect of direct benefit to participating children, and the extent to which IRBs use the federal definition of minimal risk when categorizing the risks of research procedures in children.
Responses regarding categorization of the risk level and direct benefits of pediatric research procedures.
A single blood draw was the only procedure categorized as minimal risk by a majority (152 or 81%) of the 188 respondents. An electromyogram was categorized as minimal or a minor increase over minimal risk by 100 (53%) and as more than a minor increase over minimal risk by 77 (41%). Allergy skin testing was categorized as minimal risk by 43 IRB chairpersons (23%), a minor increase over minimal risk by 81 (43%), and more than a minor increase over minimal risk by 51 (27%). Regarding benefits, 113 chairpersons (60%) considered added psychological counseling to be a direct benefit, while participant payment was considered a direct benefit by 10% (n = 19).
Application of the federal risk and benefit categories for pediatric research by IRB chairpersons is variable and sometimes contradicted by the available data on risks and the regulations themselves. To protect children from excessive risks while allowing appropriate research, IRB chairpersons need guidance on applying the federal risk and benefit categories and also need data on the risks children face in daily life and during routine physical or psychological tests.
美国联邦法规规定,只有当机构审查委员会(IRB)确定风险极小或仅比极小风险略有增加,或者该研究有望带来直接益处时,美国儿童才能参加临床研究。尽管依赖IRB,但目前尚无关于IRB如何应用儿科研究风险和益处类别的数据。
确定IRB主席如何应用联邦儿科研究风险和益处类别。
设计、背景和参与者:2002年5月至8月对美国188名随机挑选的IRB主席进行电话调查。该调查包括21个问题,以评估联邦风险标准在研究程序中的应用情况、某些干预措施是否有望给参与研究的儿童带来直接益处,以及IRB在对儿童研究程序风险进行分类时使用联邦最小风险定义的程度。
关于儿科研究程序风险水平分类和直接益处的答复。
在188名受访者中,多数人(152人,占81%)将单次抽血列为唯一被归类为极小风险的程序。100名(53%)受访者将肌电图归类为极小风险或仅比极小风险略有增加,77名(41%)受访者将其归类为比极小风险增加较多。43名IRB主席(23%)将过敏皮肤试验归类为极小风险,81名(43%)将其归类为比极小风险略有增加,51名(27%)将其归类为比极小风险增加较多。关于益处,113名主席(60%)认为增加心理咨询是直接益处,而10%(n = 19)的主席认为给予参与者报酬是直接益处。
IRB主席对联邦儿科研究风险和益处类别的应用存在差异,有时与现有的风险数据和法规本身相矛盾。为了在允许进行适当研究的同时保护儿童免受过度风险,IRB主席需要有关应用联邦风险和益处类别的指导,还需要有关儿童在日常生活以及常规身体或心理测试中面临的风险的数据。