Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2007 Sep;33(9):549-53.
doi: 10.1136/jme.2006.017129.

Attitudes of research ethics board chairs towards disclosure of research results to participants: results of a national survey

Affiliations

Attitudes of research ethics board chairs towards disclosure of research results to participants: results of a national survey

S Danielle MacNeil et al. J Med Ethics. 2007 Sep.

Abstract

Background: The offer of aggregate study results to research participants following study completion is increasingly accepted as a means of demonstrating greater respect for participants. The attitudes of research ethics board (REB) chairs towards this practice, although integral to policy development, are unknown.

Objectives: To determine the attitudes of REB chairs and the practices of REBs with respect to disclosure of results to research participants.

Design: A postal questionnaire was distributed to the chairs of English-language university-based REBs in Canada. In total, 88 REB chairs were eligible. The questionnaire examined respondents' attitudes towards offering participants completed study results, methods for delivering this information, and barriers to disclosing results.

Findings: The response rate was 89.8%. Chairs were highly supportive (94.8%) of offering results to research participants. Only 19.5% of chairs responded that a policy or guideline that governed the return of research results to participants existed at their institution. Most chairs (72.0%) supported the idea of their REB instituting a set of guidelines recommending that researchers offer results to participants in a lay format. Chairs identified the major impediments to the implementation of programmes offering to return results to participants as being financial cost (57.5%) and retaining contact with research participants (78.1%).

Conclusions: University-based REB chairs overwhelmingly support the offer of research results to participants. This is incongruent with the frequent lack of existing REB guidelines recommending this practice. REBs should support guidelines that diminish identified barriers and promote consistency in offering to return results.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Competing interests: None declared.

References

    1. Partridge A H, Winer E P. Informing clinical trial participants about study results. JAMA 2002288363–365. - PubMed
    1. Fernandez C, Kodish E, Weijer C. Informing study participants of research results: An ethical imperative. IRB 20032512–19. - PubMed
    1. Markman M. Providing research participants with findings from completed cancer‐related clinical trials: Not quite as simple as it sounds. Cancer 20061061421–1424. - PubMed
    1. Fernandez C V, Shurin S, Kodish E. Providing research participants with findings from completed cancer‐related clinical trials: Not quite as simple as it sounds. Cancer 20061071419–1420. - PubMed
    1. Schulz C J, Riddle M P, Valdimirsdottir H B.et al Impact on survivors of retinoblastoma when informed of study results on risk of second cancers. Med Pediatr Oncol 20034136–43. - PubMed