ScD is Senior Researcher at the International Rescue Committee, United States.
MA is Measurement Advisor at the International Rescue Committee, United States.
Disasters. 2019 Oct;43(4):711-726. doi: 10.1111/disa.12398. Epub 2019 Aug 22.
The number of research studies in the humanitarian field is rising. It is imperative, therefore, that institutional review boards (IRBs) consider carefully the additional risks present in crisis contexts to ensure that the highest ethical standards are upheld. Ethical guidelines should represent better the specific issues inherent to research among populations grappling with armed conflict, disasters triggered by natural hazards, or health-related emergencies. This paper seeks to describe five issues particular to humanitarian settings that IRBs should deliberate and on which they should provide recommendations to overcome associated challenges: staged reviews of protocols in acute emergencies; flexible reviews of modification requests; addressing violence and the traumatic experiences of participants; difficulties in attaining meaningful informed consent among populations dependent on aid; and ensuring reviews are knowledgeable of populations' needs. Considering these matters when reviewing protocols will yield more ethically sound research in humanitarian settings and hold researchers accountable to appropriate ethical standards.
人道主义领域的研究数量正在增加。因此,机构审查委员会(IRB)必须认真考虑危机环境下存在的额外风险,以确保最高的伦理标准得到维护。伦理准则应更好地反映在武装冲突、自然灾害引发的灾害或与健康相关的紧急情况中挣扎的人群中进行研究所固有的具体问题。本文旨在描述人道主义环境中 IRB 应审议的五个特定问题,并就克服相关挑战提供建议:在急性紧急情况下对方案进行分阶段审查;灵活审查修改请求;解决暴力和参与者的创伤经历;在依赖援助的人群中获得有意义的知情同意的困难;并确保审查了解人群的需求。在审查方案时考虑这些问题将在人道主义环境中产生更符合伦理道德的研究,并使研究人员对适当的伦理标准负责。