1
|
Sabatello M, Bakken S, Chung WK, Cohn E, Crew KD, Kiryluk K, Kukafka R, Weng C, Appelbaum PS. Return of polygenic risk scores in research: Stakeholders' views on the eMERGE-IV study. HGG ADVANCES 2024; 5:100281. [PMID: 38414240 PMCID: PMC10950748 DOI: 10.1016/j.xhgg.2024.100281] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/24/2023] [Revised: 02/22/2024] [Accepted: 02/22/2024] [Indexed: 02/29/2024] Open
Abstract
Research on polygenic risk scores (PRSs) for common, genetically complex chronic diseases aims to improve health-related predictions, tailor risk-reducing interventions, and improve health outcomes. Yet, the study and use of PRSs in clinical settings raise equity, clinical, and regulatory challenges that can be greater for individuals from historically marginalized racial, ethnic, and other minoritized communities. As part of the National Human Genome Research Institute-funded Electronic Medical Records and Genomics IV Network, we conducted online focus groups with patients/community members, clinicians, and members of institutional review boards to explore their views on key issues, including PRS research, return of PRS results, clinical translation, and barriers and facilitators to health behavioral changes in response to PRS results. Across stakeholder groups, our findings indicate support for PRS development and a strong interest in having PRS results returned to research participants. However, we also found multi-level barriers and significant differences in stakeholders' views about what is needed and possible for successful implementation. These include researcher-participant interaction formats, health and genomic literacy, and a range of structural barriers, such as financial instability, insurance coverage, and the absence of health-supporting infrastructure and affordable healthy food options in poorer neighborhoods. Our findings highlight the need to revisit and implement measures in PRS studies (e.g., incentives and resources for follow-up care), as well as system-level policies to promote equity in genomic research and health outcomes.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Maya Sabatello
- Center for Precision Medicine and Genomics, Department of Medicine, Columbia University, New York, NY, USA; Division of Ethics, Department of Medical Humanities and Ethics, Columbia University, New York, NY, USA.
| | - Suzanne Bakken
- School of Nursing and Department of Biomedical Informatic, Columbia University, New York, NY, USA
| | - Wendy K Chung
- Department of Pediatrics, Boston Children's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA 02115, USA
| | - Elizabeth Cohn
- Northwell Health 600 Community Drive, Manhasset, NY, USA
| | - Katherine D Crew
- Department of Medicine and Epidemiology, Columbia University, New York, NY 10032, USA
| | - Krzysztof Kiryluk
- Division of Nephrology, Department of Medicine, Columbia University, New York, NY 10032, USA
| | - Rita Kukafka
- Departments of Biomedical Informatics and Sociomedical Sciences, Columbia University, New York, NY 10032, USA
| | - Chunhua Weng
- Department of Biomedical Informatics, Columbia University, New York, NY 10032, USA
| | - Paul S Appelbaum
- Department of Psychiatry, Columbia University, New York, NY 10032, USA
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Budhu JA, Chukwueke UN, Jackson S, Lee EQ, McFaline-Figueroa JR, Willmarth N, Dalmage M, Kawachi I, Arons D, Chang SM, Galanis E, Hervey-Jumper SL, Wen PY, Porter AB. Defining interventions and metrics to improve diversity in CNS clinical trial participation: A SNO and RANO effort. Neuro Oncol 2024; 26:596-608. [PMID: 38071654 PMCID: PMC10995510 DOI: 10.1093/neuonc/noad242] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 04/06/2024] Open
Abstract
Despite major strides in cancer research and therapy, these advances have not been equitable across race and ethnicity. Historically marginalized groups (HMG) are more likely to have inadequate preventive screening, increased delays in diagnosis, and poor representation in clinical trials. Notably, Black, Hispanic, and Indigenous people represent 30% of the population but only 9% of oncology clinical trial participants. As a result, HMGs lack equitable access to novel therapies, contradicting the principle of distributive justice, as enshrined in the Belmont report, which demands the equitable selection of subjects in research involving human subjects. The lack of clinical trial diversity also leads to low generalizability and potentially harmful medical practices. Specifically, patients with brain cancer face unique barriers to clinical trial enrollment and completion due to disease-specific neurologic and treatment-induced conditions. Collectively, the intersection of these disease-specific conditions with social determinants of health fosters a lack of diversity in clinical trials. To ameliorate this disparity in neuro-oncology clinical trial participation, we present interventions focused on improving engagement of HMGs. Proposals range from inclusive trial design, decreasing barriers to care, expanding trial eligibility, access to tumor profiling for personalized medical trials, setting reasonable metrics and goals for accrual, working with patient community stakeholders, diversifying the neuro-oncology workforce, and development of tools to overcome biases with options to incentivize equity. The diversification of participation amongst neuro-oncology clinical trials is imperative. Equitable access and inclusion of HMG patients with brain tumors will not only enhance research discoveries but will also improve patient care.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Joshua A Budhu
- Department of Neurology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York, USA
- Department of Neurology, Weill Cornell Medicine, Joan & Sanford I. Weill Medical College of Cornell University, New York, New York, USA
| | - Ugonma N Chukwueke
- Division of Neuro-Oncology, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts, USA
- Division of Neuro-Oncology, Department of Neurology, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts, USA
| | - Sadhana Jackson
- Surgical Neurology Branch, National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland, USA
- Pediatric Oncology Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland, USA
| | - Eudocia Q Lee
- Division of Neuro-Oncology, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts, USA
- Division of Neuro-Oncology, Department of Neurology, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts, USA
| | - J Ricardo McFaline-Figueroa
- Division of Neuro-Oncology, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts, USA
- Division of Neuro-Oncology, Department of Neurology, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts, USA
| | | | - Mahalia Dalmage
- Division of Biological Sciences, University of Chicago Pritzker School of Medicine, Chicago, Illinois, USA
| | - Ichiro Kawachi
- Department of Social and Behavioral Sciences, Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, Boston, Massachusetts, USA
| | - David Arons
- National Brain Tumor Society, Newton, Massachusetts, USA
| | - Susan M Chang
- Division of Neuro-Oncology, University of California San Francisco and Weill Institute for Neurosciences, San Francisco, California, USA
| | | | - Shawn L Hervey-Jumper
- Department of Neurological Surgery, University of California San Francisco and Weill Institute for Neurosciences, San Francisco, California, USA
| | - Patrick Y Wen
- Division of Neuro-Oncology, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts, USA
- Division of Neuro-Oncology, Department of Neurology, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts, USA
| | - Alyx B Porter
- Department of Neurology, Mayo Clinic Cancer Center, Phoenix, Arizona, USA
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Kaufman R, Fair E, Reid M, Mirzazadeh A. Authorship equity in global health research: who gets the credit at University of California, San Francisco? BMJ Glob Health 2023; 8:e013713. [PMID: 37848271 PMCID: PMC10583030 DOI: 10.1136/bmjgh-2023-013713] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/15/2023] [Accepted: 09/22/2023] [Indexed: 10/19/2023] Open
Abstract
Authorship inequity exists in global health research and can be representative of unequal partnerships. Previous studies showed that low-income and middle-income country (LMIC) authors are under-represented in publications from global collaborative research between LMIC and high-income countries (HIC). However, there are little data on trends for how specific HIC institutions are performing concerning equitable authorship. We used Web of Science to find published articles affiliated with the University of California, San Francisco (UCSF), where an LMIC was referred to in the title, abstract or keywords from 2008 to 2021. The country affiliation of each author for all included articles was grouped based on World Bank data. A total of 5805 articles were included. On average, 53.6% (n=3109) of UCSF affiliated articles had at least one low-income country (LIC) or LMIC author; however, this number increased from 43.2% (n=63) in 2008 to 63.3% (n=421) in 2021. Overall, 16.3% (n=948) of UCSF affiliated articles had an LIC or LMIC researcher as the first author, 18.8% (n=1,059) had an LIC or LMIC researcher as second author, and 14.2% (n=820) had an LIC or LMIC researcher as last author. As long as manuscripts produced by UCSF have no LIC or LMIC authors included the university's commitment to authentic equity is undermined. Global health partnerships cannot be equitable without changing authorship trends between HIC and LMIC institutions.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Rebekah Kaufman
- Institute for Global Health Sciences, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, California, USA
| | - Elizabeth Fair
- Institute for Global Health Sciences, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, California, USA
- Division of Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, California, USA
| | - Michael Reid
- Institute for Global Health Sciences, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, California, USA
- Division of Infectious Diseases, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, California, USA
| | - Ali Mirzazadeh
- Institute for Global Health Sciences, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, California, USA
- HIV/STI Surveillance Research Center, and WHO Collaborating Center for HIV Surveillance, Institute for Futures Studies in Health, Kerman University of Medical Sciences, Kerman, Iran (the Islamic Republic of)
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Skuban-Eiseler T, Orzechowski M, Denkinger M, Kocar TD, Leinert C, Steger F. Artificial Intelligence-Based Clinical Decision Support Systems in Geriatrics: An Ethical Analysis. J Am Med Dir Assoc 2023; 24:1271-1276.e4. [PMID: 37453451 DOI: 10.1016/j.jamda.2023.06.008] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/15/2023] [Revised: 06/08/2023] [Accepted: 06/08/2023] [Indexed: 07/18/2023]
Abstract
OBJECTIVES To provide an ethical analysis of the implications of the usage of artificial intelligence-supported clinical decision support systems (AI-CDSS) in geriatrics. DESIGN Ethical analysis based on the normative arguments regarding the use of AI-CDSS in geriatrics using a principle-based ethical framework. SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS Normative arguments identified in 29 articles on AI-CDSS in geriatrics. METHODS Our analysis is based on a literature search that was done to determine ethical arguments that are currently discussed regarding AI-CDSS. The relevant articles were subjected to a detailed qualitative analysis regarding the ethical considerations Supplementary Datamentioned therein. We then discussed the identified arguments within the frame of the 4 principles of medical ethics according to Beauchamp and Childress and with respect to the needs of frail older adults. RESULTS We found a total of 5089 articles; 29 articles met the inclusion criteria and were subsequently subjected to a detailed qualitative analysis. We could not identify any systematic analysis of the ethical implications of AI-CDSS in geriatrics. The ethical considerations are very unsystematic and scattered, and the existing literature has a predominantly technical focus emphasizing the technology's utility. In an extensive ethical analysis, we systematically discuss the ethical implications of the usage of AI-CDSS in geriatrics. CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS AI-CDSS in geriatrics can be a great asset, especially when dealing with patients with cognitive disorders; however, from an ethical perspective, we see the need for further research. By using AI-CDSS, older patients' values and beliefs might be overlooked, and the quality of the doctor-patient relationship might be altered, endangering compliance to the 4 ethical principles of Beauchamp and Childress.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Tobias Skuban-Eiseler
- Institute of the History, Philosophy and Ethics of Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Ulm University, Ulm, Germany; kbo-Isar-Amper-Klinikum Region München, München-Haar, Germany.
| | - Marcin Orzechowski
- Institute of the History, Philosophy and Ethics of Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Ulm University, Ulm, Germany
| | - Michael Denkinger
- Institute of Geriatric Research, Ulm University Medical Center, Ulm, Germany; AGAPLESION Bethesda Clinic Ulm, Ulm, Germany
| | - Thomas Derya Kocar
- Institute of Geriatric Research, Ulm University Medical Center, Ulm, Germany; AGAPLESION Bethesda Clinic Ulm, Ulm, Germany
| | - Christoph Leinert
- Institute of Geriatric Research, Ulm University Medical Center, Ulm, Germany; AGAPLESION Bethesda Clinic Ulm, Ulm, Germany
| | - Florian Steger
- Institute of the History, Philosophy and Ethics of Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Ulm University, Ulm, Germany
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Meloney LG, Ahmed H, Bierer BE. Review of diversity, equity, and inclusion by ethics committees: A Delphi consensus statement. MED 2023; 4:497-504. [PMID: 37572650 DOI: 10.1016/j.medj.2023.06.001] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/21/2023] [Revised: 05/30/2023] [Accepted: 06/02/2023] [Indexed: 08/14/2023]
Abstract
The appropriate representation of diverse populations in interventional trials remains problematic. A Delphi process was used to affirm the central role that ethics committees and institutions play in this process and to establish consensus upon 25 consolidated recommendations across four themes to promote diversity and inclusion in interventional clinical research.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Laura G Meloney
- Multi-Regional Clinical Trials Center of Brigham and Women's Hospital and Harvard, Division of Global Health Equity, Department of Medicine, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, MA, USA
| | - Hayat Ahmed
- Multi-Regional Clinical Trials Center of Brigham and Women's Hospital and Harvard, Division of Global Health Equity, Department of Medicine, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, MA, USA
| | - Barbara E Bierer
- Multi-Regional Clinical Trials Center of Brigham and Women's Hospital and Harvard, Division of Global Health Equity, Department of Medicine, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, MA, USA; Harvard Catalyst and Department of Medicine, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA.
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Piotrowska M. Diversity and inclusion for rodents: how animal ethics committees can help improve translation. JOURNAL OF MEDICAL ETHICS 2023:jme-2023-109166. [PMID: 37407026 DOI: 10.1136/jme-2023-109166] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/10/2023] [Accepted: 06/09/2023] [Indexed: 07/07/2023]
Abstract
Translation failure occurs when a treatment shown to be safe and effective in one type of population does not produce the same result in another. We are currently in a crisis involving the translatability of preclinical studies to human populations. Animal trials are no better than a coin toss at predicting the safety and efficacy of drugs in human trials, and the high failure rate of drugs entering human trials suggests that most of the suffering of laboratory animals is futile, creating no commensurate benefit for human patients. Here, I argue that animal ethics committees have a role to play in getting us out of this crisis. Inadequate representation is a known contributor to translation failures and is a matter of both scientific and ethical concern. Ethical review committees have the authority to address it by reprioritising the values already enshrined in their guiding principles.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Monika Piotrowska
- Philosophy, University at Albany, State University of New York, Albany, New York, USA
| |
Collapse
|
7
|
Friesen P, Gelinas L, Kirby A, Strauss DH, Bierer BE. IRBs and the Protection-Inclusion Dilemma: Finding a Balance. THE AMERICAN JOURNAL OF BIOETHICS : AJOB 2023; 23:75-88. [PMID: 35482887 PMCID: PMC9926358 DOI: 10.1080/15265161.2022.2063434] [Citation(s) in RCA: 25] [Impact Index Per Article: 25.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 05/10/2023]
Abstract
Institutional review boards, tasked with facilitating ethical research, are often pulled in competing directions. In what we call the protection-inclusion dilemma, we acknowledge the tensions IRBs face in aiming to both protect potential research participants from harm and include under-represented populations in research. In this manuscript, we examine the history of protectionism that has dominated research ethics oversight in the United States, as well as two responses to such protectionism: inclusion initiatives and critiques of the term vulnerability. We look at what we know about IRB decision-making in relation to protecting and including "vulnerable" groups in research and examine the lack of regulatory guidance related to this dilemma, which encourages protection over inclusion within IRB practice. Finally, we offer recommendations related to how IRBs might strike a better balance between inclusion and protection in research ethics oversight.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | | | | | - David H Strauss
- Columbia University Medical Center
- Multi-Regional Clinical Trials Center of Brigham and Women's Hospital and Harvard
| | - Barbara E Bierer
- Harvard Medical School
- Multi-Regional Clinical Trials Center of Brigham and Women's Hospital and Harvard
- Brigham and Women's Hospital
| |
Collapse
|
8
|
Gelinas L, Strauss DH, Chen Y, Ahmed HR, Kirby A, Friesen P, Bierer BE. Protecting the Vulnerable and Including the Under-Represented: IRB Practices and Attitudes. J Empir Res Hum Res Ethics 2023; 18:58-68. [PMID: 36476180 PMCID: PMC10033343 DOI: 10.1177/15562646221138450] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/13/2022]
Abstract
Since their inception, Institutional Review Boards (IRBs) have been charged with protecting the vulnerable in research. More recently, attention has turned to whether IRBs also have a role to play in ensuring representative study samples and promoting the inclusion of historically under-represented groups. These two aims-protecting the vulnerable and including the under-represented-can pull in different directions, given the potential for overlap between the vulnerable and the under-represented. We conducted a pilot, online national survey of IRB Chairs to gauge attitudes and practices with regard to protecting the vulnerable and including the under-represented in research. We found that IRBs extend the concept of vulnerability to different groups across various contexts, are confident that they effectively protect vulnerable individuals in research, and believe that IRBs have a role to play in ensuring representative samples and the inclusion of under-represented groups.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Luke Gelinas
- Advarra; Multi-Regional Clinical Trials Center of Brigham & Women's Hospital and Harvard, Columbia, Massachusetts, USA
| | - David H Strauss
- Multi-Regional Clinical Trials Center of Brigham & Women's Hospital and Harvard; Columbia University Vagelos College of Physicians and Surgeons, New York, New York, USA
| | - Ying Chen
- New York State Psychiatric Institute, Mailman School of Public Health, 5798Columbia University, New York, New York, USA
| | - Hayat R Ahmed
- Multi-Regional Clinical Trials Center of Brigham & Women's Hospital and Harvard, Boston, Massachusetts, USA
| | - Aaron Kirby
- 1811Harvard Medical School; Harvard Catalyst, The Harvard Clinical & Translational Science Center, Boston, Massachusetts, USA
| | | | - Barbara E Bierer
- Multi-Regional Clinical Trials Center of Brigham & Women's Hospital and Harvard; 1811Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts, USA
| |
Collapse
|
9
|
Shaaban S, Ji Y. Pharmacogenomics and health disparities, are we helping? Front Genet 2023; 14:1099541. [PMID: 36755573 PMCID: PMC9900000 DOI: 10.3389/fgene.2023.1099541] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/15/2022] [Accepted: 01/10/2023] [Indexed: 01/24/2023] Open
Abstract
Pharmacogenomics has been at the forefront of precision medicine during the last few decades. Precision medicine carries the potential of improving health outcomes at both the individual as well as population levels. To harness the benefits of its initiatives, careful dissection of existing health disparities as they relate to precision medicine is of paramount importance. Attempting to address the existing disparities at the early stages of design and implementation of these efforts is the only guarantee of a successful just outcome. In this review, we glance at a few determinants of existing health disparities as they intersect with pharmacogenomics research and implementation. In our opinion, highlighting these disparities is imperative for the purpose of researching meaningful solutions. Failing to identify, and hence address, these disparities in the context of the current and future precision medicine initiatives would leave an already strained health system, even more inundated with inequality.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Sherin Shaaban
- Department of Pathology, University of Utah School of Medicine, Salt Lake City, Utah, United States,ARUP Laboratories, Salt Lake City, Utah, United States,*Correspondence: Sherin Shaaban,
| | - Yuan Ji
- Department of Pathology, University of Utah School of Medicine, Salt Lake City, Utah, United States,ARUP Laboratories, Salt Lake City, Utah, United States
| |
Collapse
|
10
|
Johnson AR, Nadkarni NM, Weber CQ. Providing Public Engagement Training to Build Connections Between the Community and Research Ethics Professionals: A Pilot Project. J Empir Res Hum Res Ethics 2022; 17:545-553. [PMID: 36113022 DOI: 10.1177/15562646221126282] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/05/2023]
Abstract
There is growing interest for research ethics professionals to engage with members of the public, yet they often lack the training needed to engage effectively. The STEM Ambassador Program provides a promising framework for training research ethics professionals to form authentic community connections and carry out effective engagement activities based on shared interests and values. The experiences of ten research administrators who participated in a pilot of the STEM Ambassador training for research ethics professionals are presented. Post-training surveys of the research administrators indicate that they valued the training and the skills obtained, and intend to continue with public engagement activities with support of their leadership.
Collapse
|
11
|
Churchill S, Largent EA, Taggert E, Lynch HF. Diversity in IRB Membership: Views of IRB Chairpersons at U.S. Universities and Academic Medical Centers. AJOB Empir Bioeth 2022; 13:237-250. [PMID: 35993964 DOI: 10.1080/23294515.2022.2110962] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/29/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Diversity in Institutional Review Board (IRB) membership is important for both intrinsic and instrumental reasons, including fairness, promoting trust, improving decision quality, and responding to systemic racism. Yet U.S. IRBs remain racially and ethnically homogeneous, even as gender diversity has improved. Little is known about IRB chairpersons' perspectives on membership diversity and barriers to increasing it, as well as current institutional efforts to promote diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) within IRB membership. METHODS We surveyed IRB chairpersons leading U.S. boards registered with the Office for Human Research Protections. Here, we focus exclusively on responses from a subset of 388 chairpersons of IRBs at universities and academic medical centers (AMCs). RESULTS Board chairs were predominantly white and evenly split between men and women. Only about half reported that their boards had at least one member who is Black or African American (51%), Asian (56%), or Hispanic (48%), with 85% of university/AMC boards comprised entirely (15%) or mostly (70%) of white members. Most IRB chairpersons (64%) reported satisfaction with the current diversity of their membership. Participants largely agreed that considering diversity in the selection of IRB members is important (91%), including to improve the quality of IRB deliberation (80%), with an emphasis on racial/ethnic (85%) and gender diversity (74%). Most participants (80%) reported some type of active DEI effort regarding board membership at their university/AMC and just over half (57%) expressed satisfaction with these efforts. CONCLUSIONS Our national survey found that although university/AMC IRB chairpersons report valuing diversity in board membership, it may be lacking in key areas. Going forward, it will be important to specify clear reasons for diversity in the IRB context, as well to establish targets for acceptable levels of board diversity and to match DEI efforts to those targets.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Sydney Churchill
- Department of Medical Ethics and Health Policy, University of Pennsylvania Perelman School of Medicine, Philadelphia, PA, USA
| | - Emily A Largent
- Department of Medical Ethics and Health Policy, University of Pennsylvania Perelman School of Medicine, Philadelphia, PA, USA.,Leonard Davis Institute of Health Economics, Philadelphia, PA, USA
| | - Elizabeth Taggert
- Department of Medical Ethics and Health Policy, University of Pennsylvania Perelman School of Medicine, Philadelphia, PA, USA.,Leonard Davis Institute of Health Economics, Philadelphia, PA, USA
| | - Holly Fernandez Lynch
- Department of Medical Ethics and Health Policy, University of Pennsylvania Perelman School of Medicine, Philadelphia, PA, USA.,Leonard Davis Institute of Health Economics, Philadelphia, PA, USA
| |
Collapse
|
12
|
Moore KT, Grundmann O, Iwuchukwu O, Rakhmanina N. The importance of diversity and inclusion in drug development and clinical trial conduct. J Clin Pharmacol 2022; 62:1475-1479. [PMID: 36074047 DOI: 10.1002/jcph.2151] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/31/2022] [Accepted: 09/03/2022] [Indexed: 11/09/2022]
|
13
|
Is representation enough or should we be targeting equitable inclusion? Nat Rev Clin Oncol 2022; 19:429-430. [DOI: 10.1038/s41571-022-00635-z] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/09/2022]
|
14
|
Reviewing fair subject selection considerations for the unique case of post sequelae COVID-19 translational studies. J Clin Transl Sci 2022; 6:e91. [PMID: 36003210 PMCID: PMC9389279 DOI: 10.1017/cts.2022.425] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/27/2022] [Revised: 06/24/2022] [Accepted: 06/28/2022] [Indexed: 11/20/2022] Open
Abstract
Fair inclusion of research subjects is necessary to ensure that post-acute sequelae COVID-19 (PASC) research results benefit all members of society. Scientists should conduct research on a broad sample of individuals who represent clinically relevant factors influencing a disease. Without demographic diversity and sociological and environmental variability, research outputs are less likely to apply to different populations and would thus increase health disparities. The goal of this narrative literature review and ethical analysis is to apply fair selection criteria to PASC research studies. We briefly highlight the importance of fair subject selection in translational research and then identify features of PASC, as well as PASC research, that hinder fair inclusion of research participants. We will demonstrate that determining an adequate and representative sample is not simply a matter of ensuring greater diversity; rather, fairness requires a broader evaluation of risks, burdens, and benefits specific to underrepresented populations. We provide recommendations to ensure fair subject selection in PASC research and promote translation toward positive health outcomes for all individuals, including the most vulnerable.
Collapse
|
15
|
Anderson EE. Sharing Research Opportunities on Personal Social Media Accounts and Fair Subject Selection. THE AMERICAN JOURNAL OF BIOETHICS : AJOB 2021; 21:40-42. [PMID: 34554068 DOI: 10.1080/15265161.2021.1965252] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 06/13/2023]
|
16
|
Diversity in probiotics and diversity in clinical trials: Opportunities for improvement. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 2021; 43:1508-1509. [PMID: 34325752 DOI: 10.1017/ice.2021.290] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/07/2022]
|