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
. 2017 Jan;122(1):78-92.
doi: 10.1352/1944-7558-122.1.78.

What's the Harm? Harms in Research With Adults With Intellectual Disability

Katherine E McDonald  1 , Nicole E Conroy  1 , Robert S Olick  2 , The Project Ethics Expert Panel  3
Affiliations

What's the Harm? Harms in Research With Adults With Intellectual Disability

Katherine E McDonald et al. Am J Intellect Dev Disabil. 2017 Jan.

Abstract

Scientific advances can improve the lives of adults with intellectual disability, yet concerns that research participation may impose harm impede scientific progress. What counts as harmful can be subjective and perceptions of harm may vary among stakeholders. We studied perspectives on the harmfulness of research events among adults with intellectual disability, family members and friends, disability service providers, researchers, and Institutional Review Board members. We found considerable variance. For example, adults with intellectual disability see exclusion from research as more harmful, but most psychosocial harms as less significant than others. All stakeholders agree that having someone else make the participation decision is harmful. Findings provide insights into the concept of harm and ethical research with adults with intellectual disability.

Keywords: adults with intellectual disability; research ethics; research harms.

PubMed Disclaimer

References

    1. Andre-Barron D, Strydom A, Hassiotis A. What to tell and how to tell: A qualitative study of information sharing in research for adults with intellectual disability. Journal of Medical Ethics. 2008;34(6):501–506. doi: 10.1136/jme.2006.019521. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Arscott K, Dagnan D, Kroese BS. Consent to psychological research by people with an intellectual disability. Journal of Applied Research in Intellectual Disabilities. 1998;11(1):77–83. doi: 10.1111/j.1468-3148.1998.tb00035.x. - DOI
    1. Becker H, Roberts G, Morrison J, Silver J. Recruiting people with disabilities as research participants: Challenges and strategies to address them. Mental Retardation. 2004;42(6):471–475. doi: 10.1352/0047-6765(2004)42<471:RPWDAR>2.0.CO;2. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Braun V, Clarke V. Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology. 2006;3(2):77–101. doi: 10.1191/1478088706qp063oa. - DOI
    1. Brooker K, van Dooren K, Tseng CH, McPherson L, Lennox N, Ware R. Out of sight, out of mind? The inclusion and identification of people with intellectual disability in public health research. Perspect Public Health. 2014 doi: 10.1177/1757913914552583. - DOI - PubMed

Publication types

LinkOut - more resources