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
. 2020 Jun;28(2):99-120.
doi: 10.1007/s10728-019-00383-9.

Co-production and Managing Uncertainty in Health Research Regulation: A Delphi Study

Affiliations

Co-production and Managing Uncertainty in Health Research Regulation: A Delphi Study

Isabel Fletcher et al. Health Care Anal. 2020 Jun.

Abstract

European and international regulation of human health research is typified by a morass of interconnecting laws, diverse and divergent ethical frameworks, and national and transnational standards. There is also a tendency for legislators to regulate in silos-that is, in discrete fields of scientific activity without due regard to the need to make new knowledge as generalisable as possible. There are myriad challenges for the stakeholders-researchers and regulators alike-who attempt to navigate these landscapes. This Delphi study was undertaken in order to provide the first interdisciplinary and crosscutting analysis of health research regulation, as it is experienced by such stakeholders in the UK context. As well as reinforcing existing understandings of the regulatory environment, Delphi participants called for greater collaboration, and even co-production, of processes involved in health research regulation. On the basis of this research, we offer insights about how health research regulation can become a matter with which a wider range of stakeholders-including researchers, regulators, publics and research sponsors-can engage. The evidence supports the normative claim that health research regulation should continue to move away from strict, prescriptive rules-based approaches, and towards flexible principle-based regimes that allow researchers, regulators and publics to co-produce regulatory systems serving core principles. By unpacking thorny concepts and practices at the heart of health research regulation-including the public interest and public engagement-our results have the potential to situate and breathe life into them. The results also demonstrate that while proportionality is well-recognised as a crucial element of flexible regulatory systems, more must be done to operationalise this as an ethical assessment of the values and risks at stake at multiple junctures in the research trajectory. This is required if we are to move beyond proportionality as a mere risk-management tool. Compliance culture no longer accurately reflects the needs and expectations of researchers or regulators, nor does it necessarily produce the best research. Embracing uncertainty-both as a human practice and a regulatory objective-may represent the brighter future for health research.

Keywords: Co-production; Collaboration; Health research regulation; Proportionality; Public interest; Regulatory stewardship; Stakeholders.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Academy of Medical Sciences. (2006). Personal data for public good: Using health information in medical research. Available at: https://acmedsci.ac.uk/policy/policy-projects/personal-data. Accessed 10 July 2019.
    1. Academy of Medical Sciences. (2011). A new pathway for the regulation and governance of health research. Available at: https://acmedsci.ac.uk/policy/policy-projects/a-new-pathway-for-the-regu.... Accessed 10 July 2019.
    1. Academy of Medical Sciences. (2016). Regulation and governance of health research: Five years on. Available at: https://wellcome.ac.uk/sites/default/files/regulation-and-governance-of-.... Accessed 10 July 2019.
    1. Baldwin R, Cave M, Lodge M. Understanding regulation: Theory, strategy, and practice. 2. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2011.
    1. Beech B. Studying the future: A Delphi survey of how multi-disciplinary clinical staff view the likely development of two community mental health centres over the course of the next two years. Journal of Advanced Nursing. 1997;25(2):331–338. doi: 10.1046/j.1365-2648.1997.1997025331.x. - DOI - PubMed