Department of Tropical Hygiene, Faculty of Tropical Medicine, Mahidol University, Bangkok, Thailand.
BMC Med Ethics. 2013 Sep 11;14:33. doi: 10.1186/1472-6939-14-33.
Recruiting minorities into research studies requires special attention, particularly when studies involve "extra-vulnerable" participants with multiple vulnerabilities, e.g., pregnant women, the fetuses/neonates of ethnic minorities, children in refugee camps, or cross-border migrants. This study retrospectively analyzed submissions to the Ethics Committee of the Faculty of Tropical Medicine (FTM-EC) in Thailand. Issues related to the process and outcomes of proposal review, and the main issues for which clarification/revision were requested on studies, are discussed extensively.
The study data were extracted from proposals and amendments submitted to the FTM-EC during the period October 2009 - September 2012, and then analyzed qualitatively and quantitatively. The main issues for clarification/revision were analyzed by thematic content analysis.
373 proposals were submitted; 44 studies involved minority groups with 21 extra-vulnerable minorities. All clinical and 2/3 of non-clinical studies submitted for initial review underwent full-board review. For combined clinical and non-clinical study submissions, 92.1% were referred back to the investigators and approved after clarification/revision, while 2.7% were deferred due to major/critical changes, and 2.1% not approved due to substantial violations of ethical principles. The main issues needing clarification/revision differed between all studies and those involving minorities: participant information sheet (62.2% vs. 86.4%), informed consent/assent form (51.2% vs. 86.4%), and research methodology (80.7% vs. 84.1%), respectively. The main ethical issues arising during the meetings, regarding studies involving minorities, included ensuring no exploitation, coercion, or pressure on the minority to participate; methodology not affecting their legal status; considering ethnicity and cultural structure; and providing appropriate compensation.
Delays in the approval or non-approval of studies involving minorities were mainly due to major or minor deviations from acceptable ethical standards and/or unclear research methodology. The FTM-EC has employed several mechanisms in its operations, including transparency in the review process, building good relationships via open communication with investigators, requesting investigators to consider closely the necessity to enroll minority groups and the risk-benefits for individuals and their communities, and the inclusion of minority-community engagement when developing the proposal. Other effective activities include annual study-site inspections, and offering refresher courses to raise awareness of minority and vulnerability issues among researchers.
招募少数族裔参与研究需要特别关注,特别是当研究涉及到具有多种脆弱性的“额外脆弱”参与者时,例如孕妇、少数民族的胎儿/新生儿、难民营中的儿童或跨境移民。本研究回顾性分析了提交给泰国热带医学学院伦理委员会(FTM-EC)的资料。本文详细讨论了与提案审查过程和结果相关的问题,以及研究中需要澄清/修订的主要问题。
从 2009 年 10 月至 2012 年 9 月期间提交给 FTM-EC 的提案和修正案中提取研究数据,然后进行定性和定量分析。通过主题内容分析对需要澄清/修订的主要问题进行分析。
共提交了 373 份提案;44 项研究涉及少数群体,其中 21 项涉及弱势群体。所有临床研究和三分之二的非临床研究都进行了全委员会审查。对于临床和非临床联合研究的提交,92.1%的研究被送回给研究者,并在澄清/修订后获得批准,2.7%的研究因重大/关键变更而被推迟,2.1%的研究因严重违反伦理原则而未获批准。需要澄清/修订的主要问题在所有研究和涉及少数群体的研究之间存在差异:参与者信息表(62.2%比 86.4%)、知情同意/同意书(51.2%比 86.4%)和研究方法(80.7%比 84.1%)。在涉及少数群体的研究中,会议期间出现的主要伦理问题包括确保不对少数群体进行剥削、胁迫或施压使其参与研究;研究方法不影响他们的法律地位;考虑种族和文化结构;并提供适当的补偿。
涉及少数群体的研究的批准或不批准的延迟主要是由于偏离可接受的伦理标准,或研究方法不明确,或存在轻微或重大偏差。FTM-EC 在其运作中采用了几种机制,包括审查过程的透明度、通过与研究者的公开沟通建立良好关系、要求研究者仔细考虑招募少数群体的必要性以及对个人及其社区的风险-收益、在制定提案时纳入少数群体社区的参与。其他有效活动包括年度研究现场检查,以及为研究人员提供提高对少数群体和脆弱性问题认识的进修课程。