Of Parachutes and Participant Protection: Moving Beyond Quality to Advance Effective Research Ethics Oversight

For the Consortium to Advance Effective Research Ethics Oversight (AEREO)

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

There are several reasons to believe that Institutional Review Boards (IRBs) and Human Research Protection Programs (HRPPs) contribute to ethical research and the protection of research participants, but there are also important reasons to interrogate this belief. Determining whether IRBs and HRPPs “work” requires empirical evaluation of whether and how well they actually achieve what they were designed to do. In other words, it is critical to examine their outcomes and not only their procedures and structures. In this response to Tsan, we argue that the concept of IRB and HRPP quality entails three dimensions: (1) effectiveness, (2) procedures and structures likely to promote effectiveness, and (3) features unrelated to effectiveness but nonetheless essential, such as efficiency, fairness, and proportionality. Because not all types of quality necessarily guarantee or entail effectiveness, we suggest that broad quality assessments, including such features as regulatory compliance and other procedural measures suggested by Tsan, are unhelpful as the first step in evaluating IRBs and HRPPs. Instead, we must start with outcomes relevant to effectiveness. To do this, we launched the Consortium to Advance Effective Research Ethics Oversight (AEREO), with a mission to define and specify ways to measure relevant outcomes for research ethics oversight, empirically evaluate whether those outcomes are achieved, test new approaches to achieving them, and ultimately, develop and implement empirically-based policy and practice to advance IRB and HRPP effectiveness. We describe several anticipated AEREO projects and call for collaboration between various stakeholders to more meaningfully evaluate IRB and HRPPs.

Original languageEnglish (US)
JournalJournal of Empirical Research on Human Research Ethics
DOIs
StateAccepted/In press - Jan 1 2018

Fingerprint

Research Ethics
Parachutes
research ethics
Research Ethics Committees
Research
proportionality
Program Evaluation
fairness
Compliance
guarantee
stakeholder
Outcome Assessment (Health Care)
efficiency

Keywords

  • effectiveness
  • empirical evaluation
  • Institutional Review Board
  • quality
  • research ethics oversight

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Social Psychology
  • Education
  • Communication

Cite this

Of Parachutes and Participant Protection : Moving Beyond Quality to Advance Effective Research Ethics Oversight. / For the Consortium to Advance Effective Research Ethics Oversight (AEREO).

In: Journal of Empirical Research on Human Research Ethics, 01.01.2018.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{bed999897dda4305964d95e7a860d91b,
title = "Of Parachutes and Participant Protection: Moving Beyond Quality to Advance Effective Research Ethics Oversight",
abstract = "There are several reasons to believe that Institutional Review Boards (IRBs) and Human Research Protection Programs (HRPPs) contribute to ethical research and the protection of research participants, but there are also important reasons to interrogate this belief. Determining whether IRBs and HRPPs “work” requires empirical evaluation of whether and how well they actually achieve what they were designed to do. In other words, it is critical to examine their outcomes and not only their procedures and structures. In this response to Tsan, we argue that the concept of IRB and HRPP quality entails three dimensions: (1) effectiveness, (2) procedures and structures likely to promote effectiveness, and (3) features unrelated to effectiveness but nonetheless essential, such as efficiency, fairness, and proportionality. Because not all types of quality necessarily guarantee or entail effectiveness, we suggest that broad quality assessments, including such features as regulatory compliance and other procedural measures suggested by Tsan, are unhelpful as the first step in evaluating IRBs and HRPPs. Instead, we must start with outcomes relevant to effectiveness. To do this, we launched the Consortium to Advance Effective Research Ethics Oversight (AEREO), with a mission to define and specify ways to measure relevant outcomes for research ethics oversight, empirically evaluate whether those outcomes are achieved, test new approaches to achieving them, and ultimately, develop and implement empirically-based policy and practice to advance IRB and HRPP effectiveness. We describe several anticipated AEREO projects and call for collaboration between various stakeholders to more meaningfully evaluate IRB and HRPPs.",
keywords = "effectiveness, empirical evaluation, Institutional Review Board, quality, research ethics oversight",
author = "{For the Consortium to Advance Effective Research Ethics Oversight (AEREO)} and Lynch, {Holly Fernandez} and Stuart Nicholls and Meyer, {Michelle N.} and Holly Taylor",
year = "2018",
month = "1",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1177/1556264618812625",
language = "English (US)",
journal = "Journal of Empirical Research on Human Research Ethics",
issn = "1556-2646",
publisher = "University of California Press",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Of Parachutes and Participant Protection

T2 - Moving Beyond Quality to Advance Effective Research Ethics Oversight

AU - For the Consortium to Advance Effective Research Ethics Oversight (AEREO)

AU - Lynch, Holly Fernandez

AU - Nicholls, Stuart

AU - Meyer, Michelle N.

AU - Taylor, Holly

PY - 2018/1/1

Y1 - 2018/1/1

N2 - There are several reasons to believe that Institutional Review Boards (IRBs) and Human Research Protection Programs (HRPPs) contribute to ethical research and the protection of research participants, but there are also important reasons to interrogate this belief. Determining whether IRBs and HRPPs “work” requires empirical evaluation of whether and how well they actually achieve what they were designed to do. In other words, it is critical to examine their outcomes and not only their procedures and structures. In this response to Tsan, we argue that the concept of IRB and HRPP quality entails three dimensions: (1) effectiveness, (2) procedures and structures likely to promote effectiveness, and (3) features unrelated to effectiveness but nonetheless essential, such as efficiency, fairness, and proportionality. Because not all types of quality necessarily guarantee or entail effectiveness, we suggest that broad quality assessments, including such features as regulatory compliance and other procedural measures suggested by Tsan, are unhelpful as the first step in evaluating IRBs and HRPPs. Instead, we must start with outcomes relevant to effectiveness. To do this, we launched the Consortium to Advance Effective Research Ethics Oversight (AEREO), with a mission to define and specify ways to measure relevant outcomes for research ethics oversight, empirically evaluate whether those outcomes are achieved, test new approaches to achieving them, and ultimately, develop and implement empirically-based policy and practice to advance IRB and HRPP effectiveness. We describe several anticipated AEREO projects and call for collaboration between various stakeholders to more meaningfully evaluate IRB and HRPPs.

AB - There are several reasons to believe that Institutional Review Boards (IRBs) and Human Research Protection Programs (HRPPs) contribute to ethical research and the protection of research participants, but there are also important reasons to interrogate this belief. Determining whether IRBs and HRPPs “work” requires empirical evaluation of whether and how well they actually achieve what they were designed to do. In other words, it is critical to examine their outcomes and not only their procedures and structures. In this response to Tsan, we argue that the concept of IRB and HRPP quality entails three dimensions: (1) effectiveness, (2) procedures and structures likely to promote effectiveness, and (3) features unrelated to effectiveness but nonetheless essential, such as efficiency, fairness, and proportionality. Because not all types of quality necessarily guarantee or entail effectiveness, we suggest that broad quality assessments, including such features as regulatory compliance and other procedural measures suggested by Tsan, are unhelpful as the first step in evaluating IRBs and HRPPs. Instead, we must start with outcomes relevant to effectiveness. To do this, we launched the Consortium to Advance Effective Research Ethics Oversight (AEREO), with a mission to define and specify ways to measure relevant outcomes for research ethics oversight, empirically evaluate whether those outcomes are achieved, test new approaches to achieving them, and ultimately, develop and implement empirically-based policy and practice to advance IRB and HRPP effectiveness. We describe several anticipated AEREO projects and call for collaboration between various stakeholders to more meaningfully evaluate IRB and HRPPs.

KW - effectiveness

KW - empirical evaluation

KW - Institutional Review Board

KW - quality

KW - research ethics oversight

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85058510609&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85058510609&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1177/1556264618812625

DO - 10.1177/1556264618812625

M3 - Article

C2 - 30541368

AN - SCOPUS:85058510609

JO - Journal of Empirical Research on Human Research Ethics

JF - Journal of Empirical Research on Human Research Ethics

SN - 1556-2646

ER -