Shore Nancy
University of New England.
J Empir Res Hum Res Ethics. 2007 Mar;2(1):31-41. doi: 10.1525/jer.2007.2.1.31.
THIS EXPLORATORY STUDY EXAMINES the experiences of community-based participatory researchers' (CBPR) with the IRB. CBPR is oftentimes applied to non-clinical questions where academic researchers collaborate with community partners to address local concerns. Constant Comparative Method guided the analysis of ten CBPR interviews. The interview questions included: How does your conceptualization of research coincide with the regulations' definition? How are community partners involved in the IRB process? What are the benefits/challenges of the IRB process? And, what recommendations do you have to strengthen the IRB process? The article concludes with suggestions for IRB reviewers and CBPR partners on how to facilitate the review of CBPR projects.
这项探索性研究考察了基于社区的参与式研究者(CBPR)在机构审查委员会(IRB)方面的经历。CBPR通常应用于非临床问题,在这些问题中,学术研究者与社区合作伙伴合作以解决当地问题。持续比较法指导了对十次CBPR访谈的分析。访谈问题包括:你对研究的概念化如何与法规定义相符?社区合作伙伴如何参与IRB流程?IRB流程的益处/挑战是什么?以及,你对加强IRB流程有什么建议?文章最后为IRB审查者和CBPR合作伙伴提供了关于如何促进CBPR项目审查的建议。