Norris Alison, Jackson Ashley, Khoshnood Kaveh
Ohio State University.
AJOB Prim Res. 2012;3(4):30-39. doi: 10.1080/21507716.2012.714836.
Observational studies have generally been viewed as incurring minimal risk to participants, resulting in fewer ethical obligations for investigators than intervention studies. In 2004, the lead author (AN) carried out an observational study measuring sexual behavior and the prevalence of HIV, syphilis, and herpes simplex virus type 2 (HSV-2), among Tanzanian agricultural plantation residents (results reported elsewhere). This article uses an ethical lens to consider the consequences of the observational study and explore what, if any, effects it had on participants and their community.
Using a case study approach, we critically examine three core principles of research ethics-respect for persons/autonomy; beneficence/nonmaleficence; and distributive justice-as manifested in the 2004 observational study. We base our findings on three sources: discussions with plantation residents following presentations of observational research findings; in-depth interviews with key informants; and researcher observations.
The observational research team was found to have ensured confidentiality and noncoercive recruitment. Ironically, maintenance of confidentiality and voluntary participation led some participants to doubt study results. Receiving HIV test results was important for participants and contributed to changing community norms about HIV testing.
Observational studies may act like intervention studies and thus incur obligations similar to those of intervention studies. We found that ensuring respect for persons may have compromised the principles of beneficence and distributive justice. While in theory these three ethical principles have equal moral force, in practice, researchers may have to prioritize one over the others. Careful community engagement is necessary to promote well-considered ethical decisions.
观察性研究通常被认为给参与者带来的风险极小,这使得研究者承担的伦理义务比干预性研究要少。2004年,第一作者(AN)开展了一项观察性研究,测量坦桑尼亚农业种植园居民的性行为以及艾滋病毒、梅毒和2型单纯疱疹病毒(HSV - 2)的流行情况(结果已在其他地方报道)。本文从伦理角度审视该观察性研究的后果,并探讨其对参与者及其社区产生了哪些影响(若有影响的话)。
我们采用案例研究方法,批判性地审视研究伦理的三项核心原则——尊重人/自主性;行善/不伤害;以及分配正义——这些原则在2004年的观察性研究中的体现。我们的研究结果基于三个来源:在展示观察性研究结果后与种植园居民进行的讨论;对关键知情者的深入访谈;以及研究者的观察。
研究发现观察性研究团队确保了保密性和非强制性招募。具有讽刺意味的是,保密性的维持和自愿参与导致一些参与者对研究结果产生怀疑。对参与者来说,得知艾滋病毒检测结果很重要,并且有助于改变社区对艾滋病毒检测的规范。
观察性研究可能会像干预性研究一样发挥作用,因此承担与干预性研究类似的义务。我们发现确保对人的尊重可能会损害行善和分配正义的原则。虽然理论上这三项伦理原则具有同等的道德力量,但在实践中,研究者可能不得不优先考虑其中一项原则而非其他原则。需要与社区进行认真的互动,以促进经过深思熟虑的伦理决策。