Institutional Review Board Preparedness for Disaster Research: a Practical Approach.
Institutional Review Board Preparedness for Disaster Research: a Practical Approach.
复制标题
机构审查委员会备灾研究：一种实用方法。
DOI：
10.1007/s40572-021-00311-x
复制
发表时间：
2021-06
影响因子：
7.9
通讯作者：
Miller A
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Packenham JP;Rosselli R;Fothergill A;Slutsman J;Ramsey S;Hall JE;Miller A
灾害越来越常见，对国家和全球的抗灾能力和应对工作构成挑战。因此，政府机构对灾害研究的兴趣增加，以了解其环境影响和与健康有关的后果。随着研究领域的极大扩展，机构审查委员会（IRB）被要求审查旨在评估灾难幸存者的健康风险，暴露和结果的研究协议。很少有IRB有审查灾害研究协议的经验。本文介绍了IRB准备审查灾害研究的方法。从人类研究保护的角度来看，主要注意力集中在可能作为研究参与者的受灾害影响的个人和/或人口的脆弱性。从我们对现有文献的回顾来看，在审查灾害研究协议方面，IRB缺乏最佳实践和/或指导。灾害研究领域的发展使人们更加关注灾害研究中潜在的伦理问题。灾难幸存者、救援人员和那些协助清理和补救工作的人可能会因为他们的经历而留下大量未满足的需求和长期的身体和情感挑战。对于机构审查委员会和调查人员来说，合作解决如何最好地保护受灾难影响的个人和社区的福祉非常重要。需要采取新的办法，系统地考虑与灾害后人类研究保护问题评估有关的各种因素。
Disasters are becoming more common and challenge national and global resiliency and response efforts. As a result, government agencies have increased interest in disaster research to understand their environmental impact and health-related consequences. With the research field greatly expanding, Institutional Review Boards (IRBs) are being asked to review research protocols aimed at assessing health risks, exposures, and outcomes from disaster survivors. Few IRBs have experience reviewing disaster research protocols. This article describes approaches for IRB preparedness in reviewing disaster research. From a human research protections perspective, primary attention has focused on vulnerability of individuals and/or populations affected by a disaster who may serve as research participants. From our review of the current literature, there is a lack of best practices and/or guidance for IRBs in the review of disaster research protocols. The growth of the disaster research field has brought more attention to potential ethical concerns of disaster research studies. Disaster survivors, responders, and those that assist in cleanup and remedial efforts may be left with significant unmet needs and long-term physical and emotional challenges as a result of their experiences. It is important for IRBs and investigators to collaboratively address how best to protect the welfare of individuals and communities affected by a disaster. A new approach is needed to systematically consider the various factors relevant to an assessment of human research protection issues following disasters.
登录
查看更多内容
影响因子：
8.3
作者：
Hoshide, Satoshi;Nishizawa, Masafumi;Kario, Kazuomi
通讯作者：
Kario, Kazuomi
影响因子：
12.7
作者：
Lichtveld, Maureen;Kennedy, Suzanne;Cohn, Richard D.
通讯作者：
Cohn, Richard D.
DOI：
10.1007/978-94-007-3864-5_11
发表时间：
2014-01-01
期刊：
DISASTER BIOETHICS: NORMATIVE ISSUES WHEN NOTHING IS NORMAL: NORMATIVE ISSUES WHEN NOTHING IS NORMAL
影响因子：
--
作者：
Macklin, Ruth
通讯作者：
Macklin, Ruth
影响因子：
7
作者：
Newman, E;Walker, EA;Gefland, A
通讯作者：
Gefland, A
DOI：
10.1073/pnas.1907826116
发表时间：
2019-10-22
影响因子：
11.1
作者：
Coronese, Matteo;Lamperti, Francesco;Roventini, Andrea
通讯作者：
Roventini, Andrea