Ethical collaborations between substance abuse researchers and community groups

 描述(由申请人提供)：这项研究的首要目标是促进我们对艾滋病毒研究人员与社区组织(CBO)之间互动中常见的伦理问题的理解，这些组织为感染艾滋病毒或携带艾滋病毒的高危人群提供服务。通过这样做，我们将产生得出原则所必需的初始数据，这些原则可用于区分构建研究人员/CBO关系的可接受和不可接受的方式。对艾滋病毒相关研究特别重要的三组人-性工作者、与男性发生性行为的黑人男性和注射毒品的人-可能是研究人员在研究中招募和留住最困难的人群之一。在美国，针对这些人群的研究经常涉及与社区组织(CBO)的合作和合作，如艾滋病服务组织、药物治疗计划、街头推广和针头交换计划。尽管这些关系非常普遍，但研究人员和CBO之间的这些关系在很大程度上还没有得到研究，但却具有重大的实践和伦理影响。我们认为，与研究合作会带来真正的伦理困境和风险，也会给CBO带来实际负担，就像它对研究对象所做的那样。然而，目前审查和监测研究道德行为的机制很少涉及或监测研究人员/社区组织的关系，也几乎没有指导方针来帮助研究人员和社区组织考虑这种关系。这些风险可能非常广泛，根据我们的经验，这些风险包括从破坏CBO与其所服务社区之间的信任关系(他们公开支持的研究人员被视为对研究对象的行为“不尊重”)到因一个研究项目导致的客流量增加而失去针头交换站点等方方面面。虽然绝大多数CBO/研究人员的互动对双方都是积极的，但与艾滋病毒研究合作或合作的负面结果意味着CBO可以而且确实经常做出不与艾滋病毒研究合作的决定，这一结果具有严重的伦理、社会和科学影响。对人类受试者进行研究的道德行为的监管是基于道德原则的应用。这些原则源于对过去研究不当行为案件所共有的共性的经验分析。该项目建议使用两种方法来复制这一过程，对艾滋病毒研究人员和与三个关键的艾滋病毒风险/流行社区合作的社区组织之间的伙伴关系中出现的共同困难、风险和负担进行实证描述和分类，并利用这些数据来制定一套初步的原则，可用于指导未来的社区组织/研究人员的合作。

 DESCRIPTION (provided by applicant): The overarching goal of this study is to advance our understanding of ethical issues that commonly emerge in interactions between HIV researchers and community-based organizations (CBOs) that serve populations at high risk for acquiring or living with HIV. By doing so, we will produce initial data essential for deriving principles which can be used to distinguish acceptable from unacceptable ways of structuring researcher/CBO relationships. Three groups of people of particular importance to HIV-related research - sex workers, Black men who have sex with men, and people who inject drugs - can be among the most difficult populations for researchers to recruit and retain in studies. Research in the U.S. with these populations has frequently involved collaboration and partnering with community based organizations (CBOs) such as AIDS service organizations, drug treatment programs, street outreach, and needle exchange programs. Despite being extremely common, these relationships between researchers and CBOs are largely unstudied, and yet have substantial practical and ethical implications. We argue that collaboration with research entails real ethical dilemmas and risks, as well as practical burdens for CBOs, just as it can do for research subjects. However, few if any of the current mechanisms for reviewing and monitoring the ethical conduct of research address or monitor researcher/CBO relationships, and few guidelines exist to assist researchers and CBOs considering such relationships. These risks can be extremely broad, and in our experience have included everything from damage to the trust relationships between a CBO and the community it serves when researchers they had publicly supported were seen as behaving 'disrespectfully' toward study subjects through to the loss of a needle exchange site due to increased foot traffic from a research project upsetting neighbors. While the vast majority of CBO/researcher interactions are positive for both parties, negative outcomes from collaborating or cooperating with HIV research mean CBOs can and do routinely make decisions to not collaborate with HIV research, an outcome which has serious ethical, social, and scientific implications. Regulation of the ethical conduct of research with human subjects is based on the application of ethical principles. Those principles were derived from empirical analysis of the commonalities shared by past cases of research misconduct. This project proposes to use two approaches to replicate this process, by empirically describing and categorizing common difficulties, risks, and burdens that arise in partnerships between HIV researchers and CBOs working with three key HIV risk/prevalence communities, and to use these data to develop a preliminary set of principles which can be used to guide future CBO/researcher collaborations.