Nguyen Emily, Appiah David, Ne'eman Ari, Shi Min, Bierer Barbara E, DeCormier Plosky Willyanne, Resnik David B
University of Virginia, Charlottesville, VA, USA.
Sanford World Clinics-Adenta, Sanford Health, Adenta, Ghana.
J Empir Res Hum Res Ethics. 2025 Jul;20(3):123-130. doi: 10.1177/15562646251338183. Epub 2025 May 8.
Unwarranted exclusion of people with uncertain or impaired decision-making capacity from participation in research violates principles of justice and fairness and adversely impacts the health and welfare of these populations. We conducted a cross-sectional study of institutional review board (IRB) policies for investigators and IRB members at 94 top-funded U.S. research institutions to better understand the guidance they provide to investigators who work with populations that have a wide range in decisional capacity. We collected data from publicly available websites and used deductive and inductive methods to develop our coding framework. We found that 41.5% of institutions had policies that require exclusion of people with uncertain or impaired decision-making capacity unless inclusion is scientifically justified. Only 5.3% had policies that require inclusion of these populations unless exclusion is scientifically justified. Eligibility criteria depended upon the risks of research in 54.3% of policies. Guidance on obtaining consent or assent was provided in 77.7% of policies and 44.7% provided guidance on assessing decision-making capacity. 30.9% of policies required that the IRB include a member who is knowledgeable of the needs and concerns of people with uncertain or impaired decision-making capacity when it reviews research pertaining to that population. Some IRB policies at U.S. research institutions may be unfairly excluding people with uncertain or impaired decision-making from research participation. Institutions should review their IRB policies to ensure that these policies protect adults with uncertain or impaired decision-making capacity from harm but also do not exclude them from research unfairly.
无端将决策能力不确定或受损的人群排除在研究参与之外,违反了公正和公平原则,并对这些人群的健康和福祉产生不利影响。我们对美国94家顶级资助研究机构的研究人员和机构审查委员会(IRB)成员的IRB政策进行了一项横断面研究,以更好地了解他们为与决策能力范围广泛的人群合作的研究人员提供的指导。我们从公开网站收集数据,并使用演绎和归纳方法来制定我们的编码框架。我们发现,41.5%的机构有政策要求排除决策能力不确定或受损的人群,除非纳入具有科学依据。只有5.3%的机构有政策要求纳入这些人群,除非排除具有科学依据。54.3%的政策中,资格标准取决于研究风险。77.7%的政策提供了关于获得同意或赞成的指导,44.7%的政策提供了关于评估决策能力的指导。30.9%的政策要求IRB在审查与该人群相关的研究时,包括一名了解决策能力不确定或受损人群的需求和关切的成员。美国研究机构的一些IRB政策可能不公平地将决策能力不确定或受损的人群排除在研究参与之外。各机构应审查其IRB政策,以确保这些政策保护决策能力不确定或受损的成年人免受伤害,但也不会不公平地将他们排除在研究之外。