Schopper Doris, Dawson Angus, Upshur Ross, Ahmad Aasim, Jesani Amar, Ravinetto Raffaella, Segelid Michael J, Sheel Sunita, Singh Jerome
Medical Faculty, University of Geneva, Geneva, Switzerland.
Centre for Education and Research in Humanitarian Action (CERAH), Geneva, Switzerland.
BMC Med Ethics. 2015 Feb 26;16:10. doi: 10.1186/s12910-015-0002-3.
Médecins Sans Frontières (MSF) is one of the world's leading humanitarian medical organizations. The increased emphasis in MSF on research led to the creation of an ethics review board (ERB) in 2001. The ERB has encouraged innovation in the review of proposals and the interaction between the ERB and the organization. This has led to some of the advances in ethics governance described in this paper.
We first update our previous work from 2009 describing ERB performance and then highlight five innovative practices: • A new framework to guide ethics review • The introduction of a policy exempting a posteriori analysis of routinely collected data • The preapproval of "emergency" protocols • General ethical approval of "routine surveys" • Evaluating the impact of approved studies. The new framework encourages a conversation about ethical issues, rather than imposing quasi-legalistic rules, is more engaged with the specific MSF research context and gives greater prominence to certain values and principles. Some of the innovations implemented by the ERB, such as review exemption or approval of generic protocols, may run counter to many standard operating procedures. We argue that much standard practice in research ethics review ought to be open to challenge and revision. Continued interaction between MSF researchers and independent ERB members has allowed for progressive innovations based on a trustful and respectful partnership between the ERB and the researchers. In the future, three areas merit particular attention. First, the impact of the new framework should be assessed. Second, the impact of research needs to be defined more precisely as a first step towards being meaningfully assessed, including changes of impact over time. Finally, the dialogue between the MSF ERB and the ethics committees in the study countries should be enhanced.
We hope that the innovations in research ethics governance described may be relevant for other organisations carrying out research in fragile contexts and for ethics committees reviewing such research.
无国界医生组织(MSF)是全球领先的人道主义医疗组织之一。MSF对研究的重视程度不断提高,促使其在2001年设立了伦理审查委员会(ERB)。该委员会鼓励在提案审查以及委员会与组织之间的互动方面进行创新。这带来了本文所述的伦理治理方面的一些进展。
我们首先更新2009年之前关于ERB表现的工作,然后重点介绍五项创新实践:• 指导伦理审查的新框架 • 引入一项政策,免除对常规收集数据的事后分析 • “紧急”方案的预先批准 • “常规调查”的一般伦理批准 • 评估已批准研究的影响。新框架鼓励就伦理问题展开对话,而非强加类似法律条文的规则,更紧密地结合MSF的具体研究背景,并更突出某些价值观和原则。ERB实施的一些创新,如审查豁免或通用方案批准,可能与许多标准操作程序相悖。我们认为,研究伦理审查中的许多标准做法应接受挑战和修订。MSF研究人员与独立的ERB成员之间持续的互动,基于ERB与研究人员之间信任和尊重的伙伴关系,实现了渐进式创新。未来,有三个领域值得特别关注。首先,应评估新框架的影响。其次,作为有意义评估的第一步,需要更精确地界定研究的影响,包括影响随时间的变化。最后,应加强MSF的ERB与研究所在国家伦理委员会之间的对话。
我们希望所描述的研究伦理治理创新可能与其他在脆弱环境中开展研究的组织以及审查此类研究的伦理委员会相关。