Ethics: 360 Degrees of human subjects protections in community-engaged research

Science Translational Medicine

Volumn 2, Issue 45, 2010, Pages

  Ross, Lainie Friedman ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

BENEFICENCE; CONFIDENTIALITY; CONFLICT OF INTEREST; HUMAN; HUMAN RIGHTS; INFORMED CONSENT; JUSTICE; MEDICOLEGAL ASPECT; NOTE; PRACTICE GUIDELINE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PRIVACY; RESEARCH ETHICS; RESEARCH SUBJECT; RISK ASSESSMENT; RISK BENEFIT ANALYSIS; SAFETY; TRANSLATIONAL RESEARCH; ARTICLE; ETHICS; HUMAN EXPERIMENT; PARTICIPATORY RESEARCH; STANDARD; UNITED STATES;

COMMUNITY-BASED PARTICIPATORY RESEARCH; HUMAN EXPERIMENTATION; HUMANS; TRANSLATIONAL RESEARCH; UNITED STATES;

EID: 77955878396     PISSN: 19466234     EISSN: 19466242     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1126/scitranslmed.3001162     Document Type: Note

References (19)

1. J. W. Jones, Bad Blood: The Tuskegee Syphilis Experiment (Free Press, New York, 1981).
2. H. K. Beecher, Ethics and clinical research. N. Engl. J. Med. 274, 1354-1360 (1966).
3. National Commission for the Protection of Human Subjects of Biomedical and Behavioral Research, The Belmont Report: Ethical Principles and Guidelines for the Protection of Human Subjects of Research (U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, DC, 1979); http://ohsr.od.nih.gov/guidelines/belmont.html (accessed 13 April 2010).
4. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), 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 (1981). Revised rules are at http://www.hhs.gov/ohrp/documents/OHRPRegulations. pdf (accessed 13 April 2010).
5. R. Dresser, When Science Offers Salvation: Patient Advocacy and Research Ethics (Oxford Univ. Press, New York, 2001).
6. R. N. Bluthenthal, L. Jones, N. Fackler-Lowrie, M. Ellison, T. Booker, F. Jones, S. McDaniel, M. moini, K. R. Williams, R. Klap, P. Koegel, K. B. Wells, Witness for Wellness: Preliminary findings from a community-academic participatory research mental health initiative. Ethn. Dis. 16 (suppl. 1), S18-S34 (2006).
7. E. Zerhouni, Medicine. the NIH Roadmap. Science 302, 63-72 (2003).
8. Clinical and Translational Science Awards, http://www.ncrr.nih.gov/ clinical-research-resources/clinical-and-translational-science-awards/ (accessed 15 April 2010).
9. L. F. Ross, A. Loup, R. M. Nelson, J. R. Botkin, R. Kost, G. R. Smith Jr., S. Gehlert, Human subjects protections in community-engaged research: A research ethics framework. J. Empir. Res. Hum. Res. Ethics 5, 5-17 (2010).
10. L. F. Ross, A. Loup, R. M. Nelson, J. R. Botkin, R. Kost, G. R. Smith Jr., S. Gehlert, The challenges of collaboration for academic and community partners in a research partnership: Points to consider. J. Empir. Res. Hum. Res. Ethics 5, 19-31 (2010).
11. L. F. Ross, A. Loup, R. M. Nelson, J. R. Botkin, R. Kost, G. R. Smith Jr., S. Gehlert, Nine key functions for a human subjects protection program for community-engaged research: Points to consider. J. Empir. Res. Hum. Res. Ethics 5, 33-47 (2010).
12. National Center for Research Resources, Guidelines for the General Clinical Research Centers Program (2001); http://www.ncrr.nih.gov/clinical- research-resources/GCRC-archives/guidenov2001.pdf (accessed 15 April 2010).
13. P. A. Singer, M. Siegler, J. D. Lantos, J. C. Emond, P. F. Whitington, J. R. Thistlethwaite Jr., C. E. Broelsch, The ethical assessment of innovative therapies: Liver transplantation using living donors. Theor. Med. 11, 87-94 (1990).
14. Association of American Medical Colleges, Protecting subjects, preserving trust, promoting progress II: Principles and recommendations for oversight of an institution's financial interests in human subjects research (2002); http://www.aamc.org/research/coi/2002coireport.pdf (accessed 15 April 2010).
15. Association of American Universities task Force on Research Accountability, Report on individual and institutional conflict of interest (2001); http://www.aau.edu/policy/COI-reports.aspx?id=10094 (accessed 15 April 2010).
16. N. Totenberg, Prologue: A case study in biomedical conflicts. Cleve. Clin. J. Med. 74 (suppl. 2), S8-S9, discussion 16-22 (2007).
17. P. A. Pizzo, Fostering innovation without compromising integrity. Cleve. Clin. J. Med. 74 (suppl. 2), S10-S11, discussion 16-22 (2007).
18. D. M. Hausman, Group risks, risks to groups, and group engagement in genetics research. Kennedy Inst. Ethics J. 17, 351-369 (2007).
19. Acknowledgments: This manuscript is based on three manuscripts published in the Journal of Empirical Research in Human Research Ethics (JERHRE) (9-11), a publication of the University of California Press, which were the final products of an NIH-funded grant, 360 Degrees in Human Subjects Protections in Community-Engaged Research. I thank my coauthors on that project: Allan Loup, Robert M. Nelson, Jeffrey R. Botkin, Rhonda Kost, George R. Smith Jr., and Sarah Gehlert. I also thank Joan Sieber, editor of JERHRE, for agreeing to publish the three manuscripts as a set, for the thoughtful reviewers she selected whose suggestions were invaluable, for her support and advice in revisions, and for permission to summarize these manuscripts for publication in this journal. Funding: this project has been funded in whole with federal funds from the national Center for research resources, NIH, through the CTSA (2001) program, part of the Roadmap Initiative, Re-Engineering the Clinical Research Enterprise (UL-1RR024999). Competing interests: the author declares that she has no competing interests.