Center for Bioethics, Health, and Society and Department of Philosophy, Wake Forest University, Winston-Salem, North Carolina.
JAMA Psychiatry. 2013 Dec;70(12):1363-71. doi: 10.1001/jamapsychiatry.2013.2105.
Risk communication and management are essential to the ethical conduct of research, yet addressing risks may be time consuming for investigators and institutional review boards may reject study designs that seem too risky. This can discourage needed research, particularly in higher-risk protocols or those enrolling potentially vulnerable individuals, such as those with some level of suicidality. Improved mechanisms for addressing research risks may facilitate much needed psychiatric research.
To provide mental health researchers with practical approaches to (1) identify and define various intrinsic research risks, (2) communicate these risks to others (eg, potential participants, regulatory bodies, and society), (3) manage these risks during the course of a study, and (4) justify the risks.
As part of a National Institute of Mental Health-funded scientific meeting series, a public conference and a closed-session expert panel meeting were held on managing and disclosing risks in mental health clinical trials. The expert panel reviewed the literature with a focus on empirical studies and developed recommendations for best practices and further research on managing and disclosing risks in mental health clinical trials. No institutional review board-review was required because there were no human subjects.
Challenges, current data, practical strategies, and topics for future research are addressed for each of 4 key areas pertaining to management and disclosure of risks in clinical trials: identifying and defining risks, communicating risks, managing risks during studies, and justifying research risks.
Empirical data on risk communication, managing risks, and the benefits of research can support the ethical conduct of mental health research and may help investigators better conceptualize and confront risks and to gain institutional review board-approval.
风险沟通和管理对于研究的道德行为至关重要,但对于研究人员来说,解决风险可能很耗时,机构审查委员会可能会拒绝那些看起来风险过高的研究设计。这可能会阻碍必要的研究,尤其是在高风险的方案或那些招募潜在弱势群体的方案中,例如那些有一定自杀倾向的人。改进的研究风险处理机制可能有助于急需的精神科研究。
为精神健康研究人员提供实用方法,以:(1)识别和定义各种内在研究风险;(2)将这些风险传达给他人(例如潜在参与者、监管机构和社会);(3)在研究过程中管理这些风险;(4)证明这些风险是合理的。
作为国家心理健康研究所资助的科学会议系列的一部分,举行了一次公开会议和一次闭门专家小组会议,讨论在精神健康临床试验中管理和披露风险的问题。专家组审查了文献,重点关注实证研究,并就精神健康临床试验中管理和披露风险的最佳实践和进一步研究提出了建议。由于没有人类受试者,因此不需要机构审查委员会审查。
针对临床试验中管理和披露风险的 4 个关键领域中的每一个领域,都讨论了挑战、当前数据、实用策略和未来研究的主题:识别和定义风险、沟通风险、在研究期间管理风险以及证明研究风险的合理性。
关于风险沟通、管理风险和研究收益的实证数据可以支持精神健康研究的道德行为,并可能帮助研究人员更好地概念化和应对风险,并获得机构审查委员会的批准。