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
. 2013 Sep 11:14:33.
doi: 10.1186/1472-6939-14-33.

Ethical issues in research involving minority populations: the process and outcomes of protocol review by the Ethics Committee of the Faculty of Tropical Medicine, Mahidol University, Thailand

Affiliations

Ethical issues in research involving minority populations: the process and outcomes of protocol review by the Ethics Committee of the Faculty of Tropical Medicine, Mahidol University, Thailand

Pornpimon Adams et al. BMC Med Ethics. .

Abstract

Background: Recruiting minorities into research studies requires special attention, particularly when studies involve "extra-vulnerable" participants with multiple vulnerabilities, e.g., pregnant women, the fetuses/neonates of ethnic minorities, children in refugee camps, or cross-border migrants. This study retrospectively analyzed submissions to the Ethics Committee of the Faculty of Tropical Medicine (FTM-EC) in Thailand. Issues related to the process and outcomes of proposal review, and the main issues for which clarification/revision were requested on studies, are discussed extensively.

Methods: The study data were extracted from proposals and amendments submitted to the FTM-EC during the period October 2009 - September 2012, and then analyzed qualitatively and quantitatively. The main issues for clarification/revision were analyzed by thematic content analysis.

Results: 373 proposals were submitted; 44 studies involved minority groups with 21 extra-vulnerable minorities. All clinical and 2/3 of non-clinical studies submitted for initial review underwent full-board review. For combined clinical and non-clinical study submissions, 92.1% were referred back to the investigators and approved after clarification/revision, while 2.7% were deferred due to major/critical changes, and 2.1% not approved due to substantial violations of ethical principles. The main issues needing clarification/revision differed between all studies and those involving minorities: participant information sheet (62.2% vs. 86.4%), informed consent/assent form (51.2% vs. 86.4%), and research methodology (80.7% vs. 84.1%), respectively. The main ethical issues arising during the meetings, regarding studies involving minorities, included ensuring no exploitation, coercion, or pressure on the minority to participate; methodology not affecting their legal status; considering ethnicity and cultural structure; and providing appropriate compensation.

Conclusion: Delays in the approval or non-approval of studies involving minorities were mainly due to major or minor deviations from acceptable ethical standards and/or unclear research methodology. The FTM-EC has employed several mechanisms in its operations, including transparency in the review process, building good relationships via open communication with investigators, requesting investigators to consider closely the necessity to enroll minority groups and the risk-benefits for individuals and their communities, and the inclusion of minority-community engagement when developing the proposal. Other effective activities include annual study-site inspections, and offering refresher courses to raise awareness of minority and vulnerability issues among researchers.

PubMed Disclaimer

References

    1. Department of Health and Human Services. Code of Federal Regulations. 2009. (Title 45 (Public Welfare), Part 46 (Protection of Human Subjects)). http://www.hhs.gov/ohrp/policy/ohrpregulations.pdf.
    1. Council for International Organizations of Medical Sciences and the World Health Organization. International Ethical Guidelines for Biomedical Research Involving Human Subjects, Guideline 13. 2002. http://www.cioms.ch/frame_guidelines_nov_2002.htm. - PubMed
    1. Bwakura-Dangarembizi M, Musesengwa R, Nathoo KJ, Takaidza P, Mhute T, Vhembo T. Ethical and legal constraints to children’s participation in research in Zimbabwe: experiences from the multicenter pediatric HIV ARROW trial. BMC Med Ethics. 2012;13:17. doi: 10.1186/1472-6939-13-17. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Grady C. Vulnerability in research: individuals with limited financial and/or social resources. J Law Med Ethics. 2009;37(1):485–493. - PubMed
    1. Vallely A, Lees S, Shagi C, Kasindi S, Soteli S, Kavit K, Vallely L, McCormack S, Pool R, Hayes RJ. for the Microbicides Development Programme (MDP) How informed is consent in vulnerable populations: Experience using a continuous consent process during the MDP301 vaginal microbicide trial in Mwanza. Tanzania BMC Med Ethics. 2010;11:10. doi: 10.1186/1472-6939-11-10. - DOI - PMC - PubMed

MeSH terms

LinkOut - more resources