1
|
Mariani J, Garau ML, Roitman AJ, Vukotich C, Perelis L, Ferrero F, Domínguez AG, Campos C, Serrano C, Villa Monte GG. Variability in Ethics Review for Multicenter Protocols in Buenos Aires, Argentina. An Observational Study. J Empir Res Hum Res Ethics 2023; 18:69-77. [PMID: 36285388 DOI: 10.1177/15562646221134620] [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: 11/16/2022]
Abstract
It has been reported that significant variability in the ethics review process affects multisite studies. We analyzed 1,305 applications for multicenter studies (409 unique protocols), from 1st January 2020 to 20th September 2021. We examined the variability in the times to approval and the first observation and the variation in the level of risk assigned. The median [IQR] variabilities were 42.19 [15.23-82.36] days and 8.00 [3.12-16.68] days, for the times to approval and to the first observation, respectively. There was disagreement in the level of risk assigned by the Research Ethics Committee (REC) in 24.0% of cases. Independent predictors of variability included the number of REC members. In our study, we found substantial variability in the ethics review process among health research protocols. Also, we describe methods to readily measure the delays and the variations in the ethics review process.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Javier Mariani
- Coronary Unit Coordinator, Hospital de Alta Complejidad en Red "El Cruce", Buenos Aires, Argentina
| | - María Laura Garau
- Comité Central de Ética en Investigación, Ministerio de Salud del Gobierno de la Ciudad de Buenos Aires, Ciudad Autónoma de Buenos Aires, Argentina
- Consejo de Investigación en Salud, Ministerio de Salud del Gobierno de la Ciudad de Buenos Aires, Ciudad Autónoma de Buenos Aires, Argentina
| | - Adriel Jonas Roitman
- Comité Central de Ética en Investigación, Ministerio de Salud del Gobierno de la Ciudad de Buenos Aires, Ciudad Autónoma de Buenos Aires, Argentina
- Comité de Ética en Investigación, Clínica y Maternidad Suizo Argentina, Ciudad Autónoma de Buenos Aires, Argentina
- Comité de Ética en Investigación Clínica Olivos, Buenos Aires, Argentina
- Comité de Ética en Investigación de la Dirección de Investigación para la Salud, Ministerio de Salud de la Nación, Ciudad Autónoma de Buenos Aires, Argentina
| | - Claudia Vukotich
- Comité Central de Ética en Investigación, Ministerio de Salud del Gobierno de la Ciudad de Buenos Aires, Ciudad Autónoma de Buenos Aires, Argentina
- Instituto de Ciencias para la Familia, Universidad Austral, Buenos Aires, Argentina
- Comité de Ética en Investigación, Hospital General de Agudos E. Tornú, Argentina
| | - Leonardo Perelis
- Comité Central de Ética en Investigación, Ministerio de Salud del Gobierno de la Ciudad de Buenos Aires, Ciudad Autónoma de Buenos Aires, Argentina
- Comité de Ética en Investigación, Hospital General de Agudos "José María Ramos Mejía", Ciudad Autónoma de Buenos Aires, Argentina
| | - Fernando Ferrero
- Comité Central de Ética en Investigación, Ministerio de Salud del Gobierno de la Ciudad de Buenos Aires, Ciudad Autónoma de Buenos Aires, Argentina
- Departamento de Medicina, Hospital General de Niños "Pedro de Elizalde", Ciudad Autónoma de Buenos Aires, Argentina
| | - Adriana Gladys Domínguez
- Comité Central de Ética en Investigación, Ministerio de Salud del Gobierno de la Ciudad de Buenos Aires, Ciudad Autónoma de Buenos Aires, Argentina
- Comité de Ética en Investigación del Hospital General de Agudos "Dr Abel Zubizarreta", Ciudad Autónoma de Buenos Aires, Argentina
- Comité de Ética en Investigación de la Dirección de Investigación para la Salud, Ministerio de Salud de la Nación, Ciudad Autónoma de Buenos Aires, Argentina
- Diplomatura de Ética en Investigación, Universidad Isalud, Ciudad Autónoma de Buenos Aires, Argentina
| | - Cecilia Campos
- Comité Central de Ética en Investigación, Ministerio de Salud del Gobierno de la Ciudad de Buenos Aires, Ciudad Autónoma de Buenos Aires, Argentina
- Laboratory, Instituto de Tisioneumonología "Prof. Dr. Raúl Vaccarrezza", Argentina
- Facultad de Medicina, University of Buenos Aires, Ciudad Autónoma de Buenos Aires, Argentina
| | - Cecilia Serrano
- Comité Central de Ética en Investigación, Ministerio de Salud del Gobierno de la Ciudad de Buenos Aires, Ciudad Autónoma de Buenos Aires, Argentina
- Hospital "Dr Abel Zubizarreta", Ciudad Autónoma de Buenos Aires, Argentina
- Carrera Interdisciplinaria de Especialización en Neuropsicología Clínica, Facultad de Psicología, Universidad de Buenos Aires, Ciudad Autónoma de Buenos Aires, Argentina
- Neurología Cognitiva y Neuropsicología, Hospital "Dr Cesar Milstein", Ciudad Autónoma de Buenos Aires, Argentina
| | - Gabriel González Villa Monte
- Comité Central de Ética en Investigación, Ministerio de Salud del Gobierno de la Ciudad de Buenos Aires, Ciudad Autónoma de Buenos Aires, Argentina
- Dirección General de Docencia, Investigación y Desarrollo Profesional, Ministerio de Salud del Gobierno de la Ciudad de Buenos Aires, Ciudad Autónoma de Buenos Aires, Argentina
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Oermann MH, Barton A, Yoder-Wise PS, Morton PG. Research in nursing education and the institutional review board/ethics committee. J Prof Nurs 2021; 37:342-347. [PMID: 33867088 DOI: 10.1016/j.profnurs.2021.01.003] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/03/2020] [Indexed: 11/29/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Institutional review board (IRB) or research ethics committee approval is intended to protect the rights of human subjects. Assurance that ethical standards are met is essential for educational research and quality improvement (QI) projects involving human subjects. PURPOSE The purposes were to describe the requirements of nursing journals for educational studies and QI projects related to education to be reviewed by an IRB or a research ethics committee and to identify the types of statements of approval or exemption to be included in manuscripts. METHOD The investigators employed an electronic survey sent to members of the International Academy of Nursing Editors list serve. Responses representing 64 nursing journals were received. RESULTS The majority of journals that publish academic educational studies (n = 32, 86.5%) always required IRB or other ethics committee review, and 17 (45.9%) required the same for QI projects related to education. An IRB or research ethics committee review was always required by journals for educational studies (n = 24, 88.9%) and for QI projects (n = 14, 51.9%) involving the professional development of nurses. CONCLUSIONS Educational studies that involve human subjects should be reviewed by an IRB or other type of research ethics committee before implementing the study. Any determination of exemption should be made by the IRB or research ethics committee, not by the investigator.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Marilyn H Oermann
- Thelma M. Ingles Professor of Nursing, Duke University School of Nursing, Durham, NC, United States of America.
| | - Amy Barton
- Daniel and Janet Mordecai Endowed Chair in Rural Health Nursing, Anschutz Medical Campus, College of Nursing, University of Colorado, Aurora, CO, United States of America.
| | - Patricia S Yoder-Wise
- Texas Tech University Health Sciences Center School of Nursing, Lubbock, TX, United States of America.
| | - Patricia Gonce Morton
- University of Utah College of Nursing, Salt Lake City, UT, United States of America.
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Peute LW, Lichtner V, Baysari MT, Hägglund M, Homco J, Jansen-Kosterink S, Jauregui I, Kaipio J, Kuziemsky CE, Lehnbom EC, Leite F, Lesselroth B, Luna D, Otero C, Pedersen R, Pelayo S, Santos R, Silva NA, Tyllinen M, Van Velsen L, Zheng WY, Jaspers M, Marcilly R. Challenges and Best Practices in Ethical Review of Human and Organizational Factors Studies in Health Technology: a Synthesis of Testimonies. Yearb Med Inform 2020; 29:58-70. [PMID: 32303100 PMCID: PMC7442520 DOI: 10.1055/s-0040-1701979] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 10/31/2022] Open
Abstract
OBJECTIVE Human and Organizational Factors (HOF) studies in health technology involve human beings and thus require Institutional Review Board (IRB) approval. Yet HOF studies have specific constraints and methods that may not fit standard regulations and IRB practices. Gaining IRB approval may pose difficulties for HOF researchers. This paper aims to provide a first overview of HOF study challenges to get IRB review by exploring differences and best practices across different countries. METHODS HOF researchers were contacted by email to provide a testimony about their experience with IRB review and approval. Testimonies were thematically analyzed and synthesized to identify and discuss shared themes. RESULTS Researchers from seven European countries, Argentina, Canada, Australia, and the United States answered the call. Four themes emerged that indicate shared challenges in legislation, IRB inefficiencies and inconsistencies, general regulation and costs, and lack of HOF study knowledge by IRB members. We propose a model for IRB review of HOF studies based on best practices. CONCLUSION International criteria are needed that define low and high-risk HOF studies, to allow identification of studies that can undergo an expedited (or exempted) process from those that need full IRB review. Enhancing IRB processes in such a way would be beneficial to the conduct of HOF studies. Greater knowledge and promotion of HOF methods and evidence-based HOF study designs may support the evolving discipline. Based on these insights, training and guidance to IRB members may be developed to support them in ensuring that appropriate ethical issues for HOF studies are considered.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Linda W Peute
- Centre for Human Factor Engineering of Health Information technology - Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, department of Medical Informatics, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Valentina Lichtner
- Centre for Medication Safety and Service Quality, UCL School of Pharmacy, UK
| | - Melissa T Baysari
- The University of Sydney, Faculty of Medicine and Health, Sydney, Australia
| | - Maria Hägglund
- Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA; Department of Women's and Children's Health, Uppsala University, Uppsala, Sweden
| | - Juell Homco
- Department of Medical Informatics, University of Oklahoma - Tulsa School of Community Medicine, USA
| | | | - Ignacio Jauregui
- Health Informatics Department, Hospital Italiano de Buenos Aires, Argentina
| | - Johanna Kaipio
- Department of Computer Science, Aalto University, Finland
| | | | - Elin Christina Lehnbom
- Department of Pharmacy, Faculty of Health Sciences, UiT The Arctic University of Norway, Norway; Department of Health and Caring Sciences, Faculty of Health and Life Sciences, Linnaeus University, Sweden
| | | | - Blake Lesselroth
- Department of Medical Informatics, University of Oklahoma - Tulsa School of Community Medicine, USA
| | - Daniel Luna
- Health Informatics Department, Hospital Italiano de Buenos Aires, Argentina
| | - Carlos Otero
- Health Informatics Department, Hospital Italiano de Buenos Aires, Argentina
| | - Rune Pedersen
- Norwegian Centre for E-health Research, University Hospital of North Norway HF, Norway; Department of Clinical Medicine, Faculty of Health Sciences, UiT The Arctic University of Norway, Norway
| | - Sylvia Pelayo
- Univ. Lille, CHU Lille, ULR 2694 - METRICS: Évaluation des technologies de santé et des pratiques médicales, INSERM-CIC-IT 1403/Evalab, Lille, France
| | | | | | - Mari Tyllinen
- Department of Computer Science, Aalto University, Finland
| | - Lex Van Velsen
- Roessingh Research and Development, eHealth group, Enschede, The Netherlands
| | - Wu Yi Zheng
- The University of Sydney, Faculty of Medicine and Health, Sydney, Australia
| | - Monique Jaspers
- Centre for Human Factor Engineering of Health Information technology - Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, department of Medical Informatics, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Romaric Marcilly
- Univ. Lille, CHU Lille, ULR 2694 - METRICS: Évaluation des technologies de santé et des pratiques médicales, INSERM-CIC-IT 1403/Evalab, Lille, France
| |
Collapse
|