The protection of unrepresented patients in emergency care research

In emergency care research, it may be the case that neither informed consent nor surrogate consent is possible. In order to nonetheless allow for such research, codes and regulations of research ethics have increasingly incorporated provisions regarding this specific situation. The protection that those provisions offer need to be better understood. This article addresses in what ways they protect individuals, and especially the extent to which the suggested protection compensates for the loss of surrogate consent. The Declaration of Helsinki, the Additional Protocol to the Convention on Human Rights and Biomedicine, and the EU Clinical Trials Regulation serve as the main illustrations.     

Person-oriented research ethics: integrating relational and everyday ethics in research

Research ethics is often understood by researchers primarily through the regulatory framework reflected in the research ethics review process. This regulatory understanding does not encompass the range of ethical considerations in research, notably those associated with the relational and everyday aspects of human subject research. In order to support researchers in their effort to adopt a broader lens, this article presents a “person-oriented research ethics” approach. Five practical guideposts of person-oriented research ethics are identified, as follows: (1) respect for holistic personhood; (2) acknowledgement of lived world; (3) individualization; (4) focus on researcher-participant relationships; and (5) empowerment in decision-making. These guideposts are defined and illustrated with respect to different aspects of the research process (e.g., research design, recruitment, data collection). The person-oriented research ethics approach provides a toolkit to individual researchers, research groups, and research institutions in both biomedical and social science research wishing to expand their commitment to ethics in research.     

The Expanding Purview: Institutional Review Boards and the Review of Human Subjects Research

The implications of the institutional review board (IRB) system's growing purview are examined. Among the issues discussed are whether IRBs are censoring research and whether the IRB review process fundamentally alters the research that is being conducted. The intersection between IRB review and free speech is also explored. In general, it is argued that the review system for human subjects research (HSR) should be modified in order to limit the scope of IRB review.     

Anticipated Ethics and Regulatory Challenges in PCORnet: The National Patient-Centered Clinical Research Network

PCORnet, the National Patient-Centered Clinical Research Network, seeks to establish a robust national health data network for patient-centered comparative effectiveness research. This article reports the results of a PCORnet survey designed to identify the ethics and regulatory challenges anticipated in network implementation. A 12-item online survey was developed by leadership of the PCORnet Ethics and Regulatory Task Force; responses were collected from the 29 PCORnet networks. The most pressing ethics issues identified related to informed consent, patient engagement, privacy and confidentiality, and data sharing. High priority regulatory issues included IRB coordination, privacy and confidentiality, informed consent, and data sharing. Over 150 IRBs and five different approaches to managing multisite IRB review were identified within PCORnet. Further empirical and scholarly work, as well as practical and policy guidance, is essential if important initiatives that rely on comparative effectiveness research are to move forward.     

Physician duties in the conduct of human subject research

In this article, I examine a skeptical argument against the possibility of ethically justifying risky human subject research (rHSR). That argument asserts that such research is unethical because it holds the possibility of wronging subjects who are harmed and whose consent to participate was less than fully voluntary. I conclude that the skeptical argument is not in the end sufficient to undermine the ethical foundation of rHSR because it fails to take account of the special positive duty researchers owe their clients and future patients. Although the skeptical argument is defeated, it exacts certain novel concessions from the pro‐research position. Of particular importance are the admissions (a) that researchers presumptively owe a fiduciary duty to research subjects, (b) that because the most important risks of rHSR are unknown and unquantifiable that duty must be explicitly waived by all subjects before they participate in any protocol, and (c) that such waivers must be made by individuals who satisfy objective criteria of competence for giving fully voluntary consent. The implementation of procedures responsive to these concerns might have a dampening effect on the conduct of research. However, the article concludes with a consideration of the likely benefits to researchers and society of a more cautious ethical regime.     

Institutional Pathology and the Death of Dan Markingson

In the spring of 2015, 11 years after a mentally ill young man named Dan Markingson stabbed himself to death in an industry-sponsored drug study, officials at the University of Minnesota suspended recruitment of subjects into drug trials in its Department of Psychiatry. University officials agreed to act only after a scathing investigation by Minnesota Office of the Legislative Auditor found damning evidence of coerced recruitment, inadequate clinical care, superficial research oversight, a web of serious, disturbing conflicts of interest, and a pattern of misleading public statements by university officials aimed at deflecting scrutiny. In this article, I examine the larger institutional factors leading up to Markingson’s suicide and prevented corrective action for so long.     

Ethics of research design

Discussions of ethical issues in research involving human subjects most usually provoke concerns about valid informed consent procedures. However, considering the recognized limitations of informed consent, arguably the way a study is designed is a more consequential concern for subject well‐being. This paper summarizes ethical issues in the design of clinical research, with reference to historic and current guidelines. Special attention is given to randomized clinical trials (RCTs) and psychiatric research.     

National,independent oversight: Reinforcing the safety net for human subjects research*

National, independent oversight is vital to resolve the problems and inconsistencies in oversight of human subjects research. Three key functions that must be considered in any proposal for such a mechanism are (1) issue spotting, (2) guidance on identified issues, and (3) sampling and follow‐up. The 1998 report and recommendations of the National Bioethics Advisory Commission concerning research involving persons with mental disorders that may affect decisionmaking capacity address these functions in part, but application is limited to a small segment of the research population. Incorporation of these three key functions in a formal, national, independent oversight process is necessary in order to ensure accountability and maintain public trust in research.     

A choice of one's own research advance directives: Anticipatory planning for research subjects with fluctuating or prospective decisionmaking impairments

Mental disorders that may affect decisionmaking capacity, like schizophrenia, have a deleterious effect not only on persons who are afflicted with the disorders but also on their families, their friends, and their communities. Realizing research to develop generalizable knowledge that may benefit this heterogeneous population is crucial. The moral challenge is to fashion processes that both respect research subjects’ autonomy and protect their wellbeing. Research advance directives may provide a mechanism that authorizes potential research subjects to make choices of their own regarding whether they wish to participate in a research protocol, to choose and appoint a surrogate decision maker, and to secure an array of protections for themselves should they lose their decisionmaking capacity during the period of the research protocol. Such research advance directives may be used by persons with fluctuating, limited or prospective decisionmaking impairments.     

Accountability and academic freedom: The battle concerning research on cold fusion at Texas A&M university

abstract

The Massachusetts Task Force on Human Subject Research has so far been the only serious attempt to investigate radiation experiments on humans. No other federal, state or private agency has looked at a specific experiment in detail. The President's Advisory Committee on Human Radiation Experiments (ACHRE) provided an overview of the entire nationwide research project, but without a thorough evaluation of any single experiment. The Massachusetts Task Force examined a group of experiments using institutionalized children at two state facilities, the Fernald and Wrentham schools, from 1943 to 1973. The experiments were performed under supervision by scientists at Harvard and MIT, and were funded by several federal agencies. The Task Force found that these experiments were conducted according to the ethical and protocol standard of their day. This did not prevent the Task Force from judging that the experiments violated human rights, and recommending apology and compensation to the victims.     

Competence and consent to research: A critique of the recommendations of the national bioethics advisory commission*

Concern about the participation of incompetent subjects in psychiatric research has grown in the last several years. In response, the National Bioethics Advisory Commission (NBAC) recommended in its recent report that all investigations involving persons with mental disorders that may be associated with cognitive impairment that may pose greater than minimal risk to subjects utilize independent assessors to verify the capacities of subjects prior to entry into the study. This recommendation poses several problems for the conduct of research and the protection of research subjects. First, it fails to target that group of subjects most likely to be at risk for incapacity. Second, it focuses on too broad a range of research projects, many of which pose little risk to participants. The substantial costs of this approach are therefore not likely to be outweighed by concomitant benefits. In place of the NBAC recommendation, the author proposes a more flexible system of capacity assessment, designed to balance the costs with a greater likelihood of achieving meaningful protection for research subjects with mental disorders.     

Too Many Rationales,Not Enough Reason: A Call to Examine the Goals of Including Lay Members on Institutional Review Boards

Every major U.S. commission appointed to review Institutional Review Boards (IRBs) as well as numerous reports and scholarly articles have recommended increasing the number of lay (nonscientist and unaffiliated) members on IRBs. Meanwhile, qualitative studies have shown that lay IRB members experience confusion about their roles, including ambiguity whether their roles are different from other members of the board. Without articulating the unique reasons why unaffiliated and nonscientist members are needed, IRBs have little guidance on how to recruit and train these members, and how many should be at the table. By looking back through the history of IRB regulations, policies, and commentaries we can articulate unique contributions these members can make. Only with these contributions in mind can we make arguments for how to best achieve them and make the case that increasing their numbers is necessary.     

'Text-work' in Research Ethics Review: The significance of documents in and beyond committee meetings

ABSTRACT

This article analyzes how a formal text (the Ethics Review Form) available at National Health Service Research Ethics Committees (NHSRECs) in the United Kingdom was used in meetings. Derived from the work of Dorothy Smith on incorporating texts into institutional ethnography (IE), it proposes the concept of “text work” as a way into understanding more about decision-making in ethics review and describes the extent to which this formal text shaped and influenced review work. The research study used observations of committee meetings, field-notes and interviews to produce an ethnographic mapping of Research Ethics Committees’ (RECs) work. This article draws on one aspect of the research which was the process of isolating a particular, ubiquitous text and analyzing how it worked and was worked on in the meetings. The analysis contributes to contemporary discussion offering an alternative to ongoing debates about idealized ways of conducting ethics review. Finally, some tentative suggestions are made about improving training, based on and starting from the work which reviewers undertake.     

Building a More Connected DSMB: Better Integrating Ethics Review and Safety Monitoring

Data and Safety Monitoring Boards (DSMBs) have become an increasingly common feature of clinical trial oversight, yet a paucity of legal or ethical frameworks govern these Boards’ composition or operation, or their relationship with other actors with monitoring responsibilities. This paper argues that prevailing structural gaps are impeding harmonized systems for monitoring the ongoing ethical acceptability of clinical trials. Particular tensions stem from DSMBs’ sweeping discretion in deciding whether and when to recommend that a trial should be terminated or amended based on safety and efficacy information. This discretion becomes especially challenging in light of DSMBs’ monopoly over emerging trial data, which prevents Institutional Review Boards, sponsors, and investigators from participating in certain pivotal and ethically charged decisions. To address these disconnects, I advocate for strengthened pre-trial and post-trial communication in addition to innovative strategies to support DSMB decision making through the life of a trial.     

Risk of Tumorigenesis in First-in-Human Trials of Embryonic Stem Cell Neural Derivatives: Ethics in the Face of Long-Term Uncertainty

While the successful differentiation of human embryonic stem cells into high purity populations of specialized cells is viewed as a major step towards the safety of prospective human transplantation trials, concerns about the possible risks of tumor formation remain. The potential tumorigenicity of transplants derived from embryonic stem cells raises distinctive ethical challenges regarding trial design, evaluation of their risks to potential benefits ratio, population selection, and post-trial subject monitoring. These challenges are examined within the context of foreseen trials for disorders of the central nervous system.     

Grave fraudulence in medical device research: a narrative review of the PIN seeding study for the Pinnacle hip system

In 2001, DePuy, a wholly-owned subsidiary of Johnson & Johnson (J&J/DePuy), initiated a seeding study called the “Multi-center, Prospective, Clinical Evaluation of Pinnacle Acetabular Implants in Total Hip Arthroplasty” (PIN Study). J&J/DePuy designed this study to develop new business opportunities during the launch of their Pinnacle Hip System (PHS) and generate survivorship data for marketing. This article, the first review of a seeding trial for a medical device, examines internal company documents relating to the PIN Study; the analysis herein focuses on the integrity of J&J/DePuy’s research practices in conception, implementation, and analysis. J&J/DePuy violated the study protocol and manipulated data; consented participants in violation of standards protecting human subjects; and did not secure Institutional Review Board approval for all study sites. J&J/DePuy used PIN Study results as the “fundamental selling point” for the PHS. Medical device seeding trials are distinct from previously-documented pharmaceutical seeding trials because companies can profit directly from device sales and because these studies may be the first clinical evaluation of the device (as was the case for the PIN Study). Seeding trials are malleable marketing projects, not rigorous scientific studies. Regulatory bodies, physicians, and others should be vigilant for persuasive marketing accounts disguised as science.     

The proximity filter: the effect of distance on media coverage of the Christchurch mosque attacks

ABSTRACT

The intense media coverage in New Zealand and Australia of the Christchurch mosque attacks exhibited significant disparity in editorial decision-making between the two countries. This research interrogates the different approaches taken in newsrooms and how these differences were manifested in broadcasts and publications. New Zealand media were focused largely on empathetic coverage of victims and resisted the alleged gunman's attempts to publicise his cause while their Australian counterparts showed no such reluctance and ran extended coverage of the alleged perpetrator, along with material ruled objectionable in New Zealand. It finds the editorial focus in each case exhibits the effect of proximity, identified in literature on empirical ethical decision-making as a factor in applied ethicality. The authors conclude that a proximity filter was used by New Zealand media who identified the victims as part of their own community, but the events of 15 March 2019 were seen as ‘foreign’ by Australian journalists who used perceived distance as justification for extremely graphic content.     

The stars hang down over the great emptiness of the level plain,and the moon bobs on the running waters of the Great River: thirty years of New Era research on the essay

新时期以来的散文研究已走过了30年的历程。由于种种原因,散文研究一直受到 轻视和责难。本文从作家作品研究、专题性研究、散文史建设和散文理论建构诸方 面,对30年来散文研究进行了全面系统的梳理和评析,并追寻散文研究长期被冷落的 原因。文章认为21世纪的散文研究要走向深入和阔大,必须从三方面用力：其一是要 建立现代意识的散文批评视野;其二是“化西方”与“中国化”;其三是思维方式与 研究方法的改变。这三方面不但是认识和解决当代散文问题的重要维度,而且对散文 研究具有方法论的意义。

关键词: 新时期?散文研究?现代视野?理论建构

New Era research on the essay and other occasional writing already has a history of thirty years. For various reasons, however, such research has consistently been slighted and condemned. This article offers a systematic and comprehensive review and analysis of the last thirty years of research in this field in terms of writers and their works, research on special topics, and the construction of the history and theory of this genre, and explores the reasons why it has been slighted for so long. To deepen and broaden this research in the new century, we must exert ourselves in three areas: first, we must adopt a modern vision of criticism of the essay; second, we must “digest Western theories” and “Sinicize essay writing and research”; and third, we must change our research methods and way of thinking. These three points not only offer an important dimension for understanding and solving contemporary issues relating to the essay, but also have methodological significance for research.     

星垂平野阔 月涌大江流——新时期散文研究三十年(英文)

新时期以来的散文研究已走过了30年的历程。由于种种原因,散文研究一直受到轻视和责难。本文从作家作品研究、专题性研究、散文史建设和散文理论建构诸方面,对30年来散文研究进行了全面系统的梳理和评析,并追寻散文研究长期被冷落的原因。文章认为21世纪的散文研究要走向深入和阔大,必须从三方面用力：其一是要建立现代意识的散文批评视野;其二是“化西方”与“中国化”;其三是思维方式与研究方法的改变。这三方面不但是认识和解决当代散文问题的重要维度,而且对散文研究具有方法论的意义。