Key Kent D
The director of the Office of Community Scholars and Partnerships at the Michigan State University College of Human Medicine in Flint, Michigan, and the chair of the Community Based Public Health Caucus of the American Public Health Association and a 2017 Robert Wood Johnson Foundation Fellow for the Culture of Health Leader Program.
AMA J Ethics. 2017 Oct 1;19(10):989-998. doi: 10.1001/journalofethics.2017.19.10.ecas3-1710.
As the Flint community endeavors to recover and move forward in the aftermath of the Flint water crisis, distrust of scientific and governmental authorities must be overcome. Future community engagement in research will require community-level protections ensuring that no further harm is done to the community. A community ethics review explores risks and benefits and complements institutional review board (IRB) review. Using the case of Flint, I describe how community-level ethical protections can reestablish a community's trust. All IRBs reviewing protocols that include risk to communities and not merely individual participants should consider how community members are engaged in the proposed research and identify and respond to questions and domains of concern from community members.
在弗林特水危机之后，弗林特社区努力恢复并向前发展，必须克服对科学和政府当局的不信任。未来社区参与研究将需要社区层面的保护措施，以确保不再对社区造成进一步伤害。社区伦理审查探讨风险和益处，并补充机构审查委员会（IRB）的审查。以弗林特为例，我描述了社区层面的伦理保护如何能够重建社区的信任。所有审查包含对社区而非仅仅对个体参与者有风险的研究方案的机构审查委员会，都应考虑社区成员如何参与拟议的研究，并识别和回应社区成员提出的问题及关切领域。
