Engaging key stakeholders to overcome barriers to studying the quality of research ethics oversight
The primary purpose of Institutional Review Boards (IRBs) is to protect the rights and welfare of human research participants. Evaluation and measurement of how IRBs satisfy this purpose and other important goals are open questions that demand empirical research. Research on IRBs, and the Human Rese...
| Main Authors: | , , , , , , , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
SAGE Publishing
2023-01-01
|
| Series: | Research Ethics Review |
| Online Access: | https://doi.org/10.1177/17470161221138028 |
| _version_ | 1811187469584957440 |
|---|---|
| author | Emily E Anderson Elisa A Hurley Kimberley Serpico Ann Johnson Jessica Rowe Megan Singleton Barbara E Bierer Brooke Cholka Swapnali Chaudhari Holly Fernandez Lynch |
| author_facet | Emily E Anderson Elisa A Hurley Kimberley Serpico Ann Johnson Jessica Rowe Megan Singleton Barbara E Bierer Brooke Cholka Swapnali Chaudhari Holly Fernandez Lynch |
| author_sort | Emily E Anderson |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | The primary purpose of Institutional Review Boards (IRBs) is to protect the rights and welfare of human research participants. Evaluation and measurement of how IRBs satisfy this purpose and other important goals are open questions that demand empirical research. Research on IRBs, and the Human Research Protection Programs (HRPPs) of which they are often a part, is necessary to inform evidence-based practices, policies, and approaches to quality improvement in human research protections. However, to date, HRPP and IRB engagement in empirical research about their own activities and performance has been limited. To promote engagement of HRPPs and IRBs in self-reflective research on HRPP and IRB quality and effectiveness, barriers to their participation need to be addressed. These include: extensive workloads, limited information technology systems, and few universally accepted or consistently measured metrics for HRPP/IRB quality and effectiveness. Additionally, institutional leaders may have concerns about confidentiality. Professional norms around the value of participating in this type of research are lacking. Lastly, obtaining external funding for research on IRBs and HRPPs is challenging. As a group of HRPP professionals and researchers actively involved in a research consortium focused on IRB quality and effectiveness, we identify potential levers for supporting and encouraging HRPP and IRB engagement in research on quality and effectiveness. We maintain that this research should be informed by the core principles of patient- and community-engaged research, in which members and key stakeholders of the community to be studied are included as key informants and members of the research team. This ensures that relevant questions are asked and that data are interpreted to produce meaningful recommendations. As such, we offer several ways to increase the participation of HRPP professionals in research as participants, as data sharers, and as investigators. |
| first_indexed | 2024-04-11T14:02:57Z |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj.art-b242bbbb649045d8b80f9d62f38ab940 |
| institution | Directory Open Access Journal |
| issn | 1747-0161 2047-6094 |
| language | English |
| last_indexed | 2024-04-11T14:02:57Z |
| publishDate | 2023-01-01 |
| publisher | SAGE Publishing |
| record_format | Article |
| series | Research Ethics Review |
| spelling | doaj.art-b242bbbb649045d8b80f9d62f38ab9402022-12-22T04:20:01ZengSAGE PublishingResearch Ethics Review1747-01612047-60942023-01-011910.1177/17470161221138028Engaging key stakeholders to overcome barriers to studying the quality of research ethics oversightEmily E AndersonElisa A HurleyKimberley SerpicoAnn JohnsonJessica RoweMegan SingletonBarbara E BiererBrooke CholkaSwapnali ChaudhariHolly Fernandez LynchThe primary purpose of Institutional Review Boards (IRBs) is to protect the rights and welfare of human research participants. Evaluation and measurement of how IRBs satisfy this purpose and other important goals are open questions that demand empirical research. Research on IRBs, and the Human Research Protection Programs (HRPPs) of which they are often a part, is necessary to inform evidence-based practices, policies, and approaches to quality improvement in human research protections. However, to date, HRPP and IRB engagement in empirical research about their own activities and performance has been limited. To promote engagement of HRPPs and IRBs in self-reflective research on HRPP and IRB quality and effectiveness, barriers to their participation need to be addressed. These include: extensive workloads, limited information technology systems, and few universally accepted or consistently measured metrics for HRPP/IRB quality and effectiveness. Additionally, institutional leaders may have concerns about confidentiality. Professional norms around the value of participating in this type of research are lacking. Lastly, obtaining external funding for research on IRBs and HRPPs is challenging. As a group of HRPP professionals and researchers actively involved in a research consortium focused on IRB quality and effectiveness, we identify potential levers for supporting and encouraging HRPP and IRB engagement in research on quality and effectiveness. We maintain that this research should be informed by the core principles of patient- and community-engaged research, in which members and key stakeholders of the community to be studied are included as key informants and members of the research team. This ensures that relevant questions are asked and that data are interpreted to produce meaningful recommendations. As such, we offer several ways to increase the participation of HRPP professionals in research as participants, as data sharers, and as investigators.https://doi.org/10.1177/17470161221138028 |
| spellingShingle | Emily E Anderson Elisa A Hurley Kimberley Serpico Ann Johnson Jessica Rowe Megan Singleton Barbara E Bierer Brooke Cholka Swapnali Chaudhari Holly Fernandez Lynch Engaging key stakeholders to overcome barriers to studying the quality of research ethics oversight Research Ethics Review |
| title | Engaging key stakeholders to overcome barriers to studying the quality of research ethics oversight |
| title_full | Engaging key stakeholders to overcome barriers to studying the quality of research ethics oversight |
| title_fullStr | Engaging key stakeholders to overcome barriers to studying the quality of research ethics oversight |
| title_full_unstemmed | Engaging key stakeholders to overcome barriers to studying the quality of research ethics oversight |
| title_short | Engaging key stakeholders to overcome barriers to studying the quality of research ethics oversight |
| title_sort | engaging key stakeholders to overcome barriers to studying the quality of research ethics oversight |
| url | https://doi.org/10.1177/17470161221138028 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT emilyeanderson engagingkeystakeholderstoovercomebarrierstostudyingthequalityofresearchethicsoversight AT elisaahurley engagingkeystakeholderstoovercomebarrierstostudyingthequalityofresearchethicsoversight AT kimberleyserpico engagingkeystakeholderstoovercomebarrierstostudyingthequalityofresearchethicsoversight AT annjohnson engagingkeystakeholderstoovercomebarrierstostudyingthequalityofresearchethicsoversight AT jessicarowe engagingkeystakeholderstoovercomebarrierstostudyingthequalityofresearchethicsoversight AT megansingleton engagingkeystakeholderstoovercomebarrierstostudyingthequalityofresearchethicsoversight AT barbaraebierer engagingkeystakeholderstoovercomebarrierstostudyingthequalityofresearchethicsoversight AT brookecholka engagingkeystakeholderstoovercomebarrierstostudyingthequalityofresearchethicsoversight AT swapnalichaudhari engagingkeystakeholderstoovercomebarrierstostudyingthequalityofresearchethicsoversight AT hollyfernandezlynch engagingkeystakeholderstoovercomebarrierstostudyingthequalityofresearchethicsoversight |