Nine key functions for a human subjects protection program for community-engaged research: points to consider

Journal of Empirical Research on Human Research Ethics

Volumn 5, Issue 1, 2010, Pages 33-47

  Ross, Lainie Friedman ^a   Loup, Allan ^b   Nelson, Robert M ^c   Botkin, Jeffrey R ^d   Kost, Rhonda ^e   Smith Jr , George R ^f   Gehlert, Sarah ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON   (United States)

^c UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA   (United States)

^d UNIVERSITY OF UTAH   (United States)

^e ROCKEFELLER UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^f Healthcare Consortium of Illinois ^*  (United States)

Author keywords

Community based participatory research; Community engaged research; Conflicts of interest; Data safety monitoring plan; Human subjects protections; Informed consent; Justice; Risks; Subject selection

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; CONFIDENTIALITY; CONFLICT OF INTEREST; EDUCATION; ETHICS; HUMAN; HUMAN EXPERIMENT; INFORMED CONSENT; ORGANIZATION AND MANAGEMENT; PARTICIPATORY RESEARCH; PATIENT SELECTION; PEER REVIEW; PERSONNEL; PUBLIC RELATIONS; RISK MANAGEMENT; SOCIAL JUSTICE; VULNERABLE POPULATION;

COMMUNITY-BASED PARTICIPATORY RESEARCH; COMMUNITY-INSTITUTIONAL RELATIONS; CONFIDENTIALITY; CONFLICT OF INTEREST; HUMAN EXPERIMENTATION; HUMANS; INFORMED CONSENT; PATIENT SELECTION; PEER REVIEW, RESEARCH; RESEARCH PERSONNEL; RISK MANAGEMENT; SOCIAL JUSTICE; VULNERABLE POPULATIONS;

EID: 77949791500     PISSN: 15562646     EISSN: 15562654     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1525/jer.2010.5.1.33     Document Type: Article

References (29)

1. Association of American Medical Colleges. (2002). Protecting subjects, preserving trust, promoting progress, II. Policy and guidelines for the oversight of individual financial interests in human subjects research. Retrieved January 25, 2010 from http://www.aamc.org/research/coi/2002coireport. pdf.
2. Association of American Universities Task Force on Research Accountability. (2001) AAU report on individual and institutional conflict of interest. Retrieved January 25, 2010 from http://www.aau.edu/policy/COI-reports. aspx?id=10094.
3. Association of University Technology Managers. (2006). U. S. licensing activity survey: FY 2006. Deerfield, IL: Association of University Technology Managers.
4. BAQUET, C. R., HENDERSON, K., COMMISKEY, P., & MORROW, J. N. (2008). Clinical trials: The art of enrollment. Seminars in Oncology Nursing, 24 (4), 262-269.
5. BESKOW, L. M., GRADY, C., ILTIS, A. S., SADLER, J. Z., & WILFOND, B. S. (2009) Points to consider: The relationship between research ethics consultation and institutional review boards. IRB: Ethics & Human Research, 31 (6), 1-9.
6. BRUGGE, D., KAPUNAN, P., BABCOCK-DUNNING, L., MATLOFF, R. G., CAGUA-KOO, D., OKOROH, E., SALAS, F. L., BRADEEN, L. & WOODLIN, M. (2009). Developing methods to compare low-education community-based and university-based survey teams. Health Promotion Practice OnlineFirst, doi:10.1177/15244839908329120.
7. CIMENT, J. (2000). Gene therapy experiments put on "clinical hold." British Medical Journal, 320, 336.
8. Comprehensive Drug Abuse Prevention and Control Act. (1970). Pub L No 91-513, 3 (aa)
9. Stat. 1241.
10. COOPER, Z. N., NELSON R. M., & ROSS, L. F. (2004). Certificates of confidentiality in research: Rationale and usage. Genetic Testing, 8 (2), 214-220.
11. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS). (1981). Protection of human subjects: Final regulations amending basic HHS policy for the protection of human research subjects (45 CFR 46, Subpart A). Federal Register, 46, 8366-8391.
12. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS). (2009). Protection of human subjects. Revised rules (45 CFR 46). Retrieved January 28, 2010 from http://www.hhs.gov/ohrp/documents/OHRPRegulations.pdf.
13. Department of Health and Human Services, Office of Extramural Research. Certificates of confidentiality kiosk. Retrieved January 11, 2010 from http://grants2.nih.gov/grants/policy/coc/.
14. DINAN, M. A., WEINFURT, K. P., FRIEDMAN, J. Y., ALLSBROOK, J. S., GOTTLIEB, J., SCHULMAN, K. A., HALL, M. A., DHILLON, J. K., & SUGARMAN, J. (2006). Comparison of conflict of interest policies and reported practices in academic medical centers in the United States. Accountability in Research. 13, 325-342.
15. DRESSER, R. (2001). When science offers salvation: Patient advocacy and research ethics. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
16. EMANUEL, E. J., & STEINER D. (1995). Institutional conflict of onterest. New England Journal of Medicine. 332, 262-268.
17. LEVINE, R. J. (1986). Ethics and regulation of clinical research. Baltimore, MD: Urban & Schwarzenberg.
18. MONTANARO, L. (2009). The democratic legitimacy of 'self-appointed' representatives. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of British Columbia, Canada.
19. MOSES, H., III, DORSEY, E. R., MATHESON, D. H., & THEIR, S. O. (2005). Financial anatomy of biomedical research. Journal of the American Medical Association, 394 (11), 1333-1342.
20. National Center for Research Resources. (2001). Guidelines for the general Clinical Research Centers Program. Retrieved January 8, 2010 from http://www.ncrr.nih.gov/clinical-research-resources/GCRC-archives/guidenov2001. pdf.
21. National Institutes of Health. (1998). Policy for data and safety monitoring. Retrieved January 8, 2010 from http://grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/ notice-files/NOT98-084.html.
22. National Science Foundation. (2010). Science and engineering indicators 2010. Appendix Table 5-45: U. S. utility patent awards, by selected characteristics of patent owner: 1998-2008. Retrieved January 29, 2010 from http://www.nsf.gov/statistics/seind10/pdf/at.pdf.
23. NIH Clinical Trials Committee. (1979). Clinical trial activity. NIH Guide for Grants and Contracts, 8 (8), 29. Retrieved January 8, 2010 from http://grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/historical/1979-06-05-Vol-08-No-08.pdf.
24. PAPPWORTH, M. H. (1967). Human guinea pigs: Experimentation on man. London, England: Routledge and Kegan Paul Ltd.
25. SHAVERS-HORNADAY, V. L., LYNCH, C. F., BURMEISTER, L. F., & TORNER, J. C. (1997). Why are African Americans under-represented in medical research studies? Impediments to participation. Ethnicity and Health, 2 (1-2), 31-45.
26. SINGER, P. A., SIEGLER, M., WHITINGTON, P. F., LANTOS, J. D., EMOND, J. C., THISTLETHWAITE, J. R., & BROELSCH, C. E. (1990). The ethical assessment of innovative therapies: Liver transplantation using living donors. Theoretical Medicine, 11 (2), 87-94.
27. SLAUGHTER, S., FELDMAN M. P., & THOMAS, S. L. (2009). U. S. research universities' institutional conflict of interest policies. Journal of Empirical Research on Human Research Ethics, 4 (3), 3-20.
28. THOMPSON, D. F. (1993). Understanding financial conflicts of interest. New England Journal of Medicine, 329 (8), 573-576.
29. WEINFURT, K. P., FRIEDMAN, J. Y., DINAN, M. A., ALLSBROOK, J. S., HALL, M. A., DHILLON, J. K., & SUGARMAN, J. (2006). Disclosing conflicts of interest in clinical research: Views of Institutional Review Boards, Conflict of Interest committees, and investigators. Journal of Law, Medicine, & Ethics. 34 (3), 581-591.