National Academies Press: OpenBook
Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Research Council. 2003. Protecting Participants and Facilitating Social and Behavioral Sciences Research. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/10638.
×
PageR1
Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Research Council. 2003. Protecting Participants and Facilitating Social and Behavioral Sciences Research. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/10638.
×
PageR2
Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Research Council. 2003. Protecting Participants and Facilitating Social and Behavioral Sciences Research. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/10638.
×
PageR3
Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Research Council. 2003. Protecting Participants and Facilitating Social and Behavioral Sciences Research. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/10638.
×
PageR4
Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Research Council. 2003. Protecting Participants and Facilitating Social and Behavioral Sciences Research. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/10638.
×
PageR5
Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Research Council. 2003. Protecting Participants and Facilitating Social and Behavioral Sciences Research. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/10638.
×
PageR6
Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Research Council. 2003. Protecting Participants and Facilitating Social and Behavioral Sciences Research. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/10638.
×
PageR7
Page viii Cite
Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Research Council. 2003. Protecting Participants and Facilitating Social and Behavioral Sciences Research. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/10638.
×
PageR8
Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Research Council. 2003. Protecting Participants and Facilitating Social and Behavioral Sciences Research. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/10638.
×
PageR9
Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Research Council. 2003. Protecting Participants and Facilitating Social and Behavioral Sciences Research. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/10638.
×
PageR10
Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Research Council. 2003. Protecting Participants and Facilitating Social and Behavioral Sciences Research. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/10638.
×
PageR11
Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Research Council. 2003. Protecting Participants and Facilitating Social and Behavioral Sciences Research. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/10638.
×
PageR12
Page xiii Cite
Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Research Council. 2003. Protecting Participants and Facilitating Social and Behavioral Sciences Research. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/10638.
×
PageR13
Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Research Council. 2003. Protecting Participants and Facilitating Social and Behavioral Sciences Research. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/10638.
×
PageR14
Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Research Council. 2003. Protecting Participants and Facilitating Social and Behavioral Sciences Research. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/10638.
×
PageR15
Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Research Council. 2003. Protecting Participants and Facilitating Social and Behavioral Sciences Research. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/10638.
×
PageR16
Page xvii Cite
Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Research Council. 2003. Protecting Participants and Facilitating Social and Behavioral Sciences Research. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/10638.
×
PageR17
Page xviii Cite
Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Research Council. 2003. Protecting Participants and Facilitating Social and Behavioral Sciences Research. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/10638.
×
PageR18

Below is the uncorrected machine-read text of this chapter, intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text of each book. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.

THE NATIONAL ACADEMIES PRESS 500 Fifth Street, NW Washington, DC 20001 NOTICE: The project that is the subject of this report was approved by the Governing Board of the National Research Council, whose members are drawn from the councils of the National Academy of Sciences, the National Academy of Engineering, and the Institute of Medicine. The members of the committee responsible for the report were chosen for their special competences and with regard for appropriate balance. The project that is the subject of this report was supported by contract no. SBR-9709489 between the National Academy of Sciences and the National Science Foundation. Any opinions, findings, conclusions, or recommendations expressed in this publication are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the organizations or agencies that provided support for the project. International Standard Book Number 0-309-08852-6 (book) International Standard Book Number 0-309-51136-4 (PDF) Library of Congress Control Number: 2003106396 Additional copies of this report are available from the National Academies Press, 500 Fifth Street, NW, Washington, D.C. 20001; (202) 334-3096; Internet, http://www.nap.edu Copyright 2003 by the National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved. Printed in the United States of America Suggested citation: National Research Council (2003). Protecting Participants and Facilitating Social and Behavioral Sciences Research. Panel on Institutional Review Boards, Surveys, and Social Science Research. Constance F. Citro, Daniel R. Ilgen, and Cora B. Marrett, eds. Committee on National Statistics and Board on Behavioral, Cognitive, and Sensory Sciences. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.

The National Academy of Sciences is a private, nonprofit, self-perpetuating so- ciety of distinguished scholars engaged in scientific and engineering research, dedicated to the furtherance of science and technology and to their use for the general welfare. Upon the authority of the charter granted to it by the Congress in 1863, the Academy has a mandate that requires it to advise the federal gov- ernment on scientific and technical matters. Dr. Bruce M. Alberts is president of the National Academy of Sciences. The National Academy of Engineering was established in 1964, under the char- ter of the National Academy of Sciences, as a parallel organization of outstand- ing engineers. It is autonomous in its administration and in the selection of its members, sharing with the National Academy of Sciences the responsibility for advising the federal government. The National Academy of Engineering also sponsors engineering programs aimed at meeting national needs, encourages education and research, and recognizes the superior achievements of engi- neers. Dr. Wm. A. Wulf is president of the National Academy of Engineering. The Institute of Medicine was established in 1970 by the National Academy of Sciences to secure the services of eminent members of appropriate professions in the examination of policy matters pertaining to the health of the public. The Institute acts under the responsibility given to the National Academy of Sciences by its congressional charter to be an adviser to the federal govern- ment and, upon its own initiative, to identify issues of medical care, research, and education. Dr. Harvey V. Fineberg is president of the Institute of Medicine. The National Research Council was organized by the National Academy of Sciences in 1916 to associate the broad community of science and technology with the Academy’s purposes of furthering knowledge and advising the federal government. Functioning in accordance with general policies determined by the Academy, the Council has become the principal operating agency of both the National Academy of Sciences and the National Academy of Engineering in providing services to the government, the public, and the scientific and en- gineering communities. The Council is administered jointly by both Academies and the Institute of Medicine. Dr. Bruce M. Alberts and Dr. Wm. A. Wulf are chair and vice chair, respectively, of the National Research Council. www.national-academies.org

PANEL ON INSTITUTIONAL REVIEW BOARDS, SURVEYS, AND SOCIAL SCIENCE RESEARCH C ORA B. M ARRET T (Chair), Academic Affairs, University of Wisconsin System Administration D ANIEL R. I LGEN (Vice Chair), Department of Psychology and Management, Michigan State University T ORA KAY B IKSON, Department of Behavioral Sciences, The RAND Corporation, Santa Monica, California R OBERT M. G ROVES, Survey Research Center, University of Michigan, and Joint Program in Survey Methodology R OBERT M. H AUSER, Center for Demography of Health and Aging, University of Wisconsin-Madison V. J OSEPH H OTZ, Department of Economics, University of California at Los Angeles PATRICIA M ARSHALL, Department of Biomedical Ethics, Case Western Reserve University A NNA C. M ASTROIANNI, School of Law and Institute for Public Health Genetics, University of Washington J OHN J. M C A RDLE, Department of Psychology, University of Virginia E LEANOR S INGER, Institute for Social Research, University of Michigan W ILLIAM A. Y OST (Liaison), Board on Behavioral, Cognitive, and Sensory Sciences; Graduate School, Loyola University, Chicago C ONSTANCE F. C ITRO, Study Director J AMIE C ASEY, Research Assistant TANYA M. L EE, Project Assistant v

COMMITTEE ON NATIONAL STATISTICS 2003 J OHN E. R OLPH (Chair), Marshall School of Business, University of Southern California J OSEPH G. A LTONJI, Department of Economics, Yale University R OBERT M. B ELL, AT&T Labs—Research, Florham Park, New Jersey L AWRENCE D. B ROWN, Department of Statistics, The Wharton School, University of Pennsylvania R OBERT M. G ROVES, Survey Research Center, University of Michigan, and Joint Program in Survey Methodology J OEL L. H OROWITZ, Department of Economics, Northwestern University W ILLIAM KALSBEEK, Survey Research Unit, Department of Biostatistics, University of North Carolina A RLEEN L EIBOWITZ, School of Public Policy and Social Research, University of California at Los Angeles T HOMAS A. L OUIS, Bloomberg School of Public Health, Johns Hopkins University V IJAYAN N AIR, Department of Statistics and Department of Industrial and Operations Engineering, University of Michigan D ARYL P REGIBON, AT&T Labs—Research, Florham Park, New Jersey K ENNETH P REWIT T, School of Public Affairs, Columbia University N ORA C ATE S CHAEFFER, Department of Sociology, University of Wisconsin-Madison M AT THEW D. S HAPIRO, Department of Economics, University of Michigan A NDREW A. W HITE, Director vi

BOARD ON BEHAVIORAL, COGNITIVE, AND SENSORY SCIENCES 2003 A NNE P ETERSEN (Chair), W.K. Kellogg Foundation, Battle Creek, Michigan L INDA M ARIE B URTON, Center for Human Development and Family Research, Pennsylvania State University S TEPHEN J. C ECI, Department of Human Development, Cornell University E UGENE K. E MORY, Department of Psychology, Emory University R OCHEL G ELMAN, Department of Psychology and Cognitive Science, Rutgers University A NTHONY W. J ACKSON, The Galef Institute, Los Angeles, California P ETER L ENNIE, Dean for Science, New York University M ARCIA C. L INN, Graduate School of Education, University of California at Berkeley E LISSA L. N EWPORT, Department of Brain and Cognitive Sciences, University of Rochester C HARLES R. P LOT T, Division of Humanities and Social Sciences, California Institute of Technology M ICHAEL L. R UT TER, Social, Genetic, and Developmental Psychiatry Research Centre, University of London A RNOLD S AMEROFF, Center for Human Growth and Development, University of Michigan J AMES W. S TIGLER, Department of Psychology, University of California at Los Angeles W ILLIAM A. Y OST, Graduate School, Loyola University, Chicago C HRISTINE R. H ARTEL, Director vii

Acknowledgments The Panel on Institutional Review Boards, Surveys, and Social Sci- ence Research thanks the many people who contributed their time and expertise to the preparation of this report. We are grateful to everyone who attended the panel’s first meet- ing and provided perspectives on issues of human research participant protection in the social, behavioral, and economic sciences (SBES). We acknowledge the wealth of information that we obtained from web- sites of private and public organizations and from previous surveys of the review process for research with human participants (see the appendices). We also acknowledge the very useful paper by George Duncan, of Carnegie Mellon University, on confidentiality and data ac- cess issues for institutional review boards (IRBs), which is reproduced as Appendix E. We thank the staff of the National Research Council for their helpful advice and input, including Andrew White, director of the Committee on National Statistics; Christine Hartel, director of the Board on Behavioral, Cognitive, and Sensory Sciences; and Laura Lyman Rodriguez and Jessica Aungst, staff to the Institute of Medicine Committee on Assessing the System for Protecting Human Research Participants. That committee produced the very useful report, Respon- sible Research, which provides an invaluable perspective on the work of IRBs, primarily in the biomedical fields. Eugenia Grohman, director of the reports office of the Division of Behavioral and Social Sciences and Education, made important contributions to our report through her fine technical editing. Our panel was assisted by a very able staff. We are grateful to Vir- ginia A. deWolf, now at the U.S. Bureau of Transportation Statistics, who served as the panel’s first study director. She did a masterful job of organizing the panel’s meetings, reaching out to other groups that are active in human research participant protection issues, and assembling a wealth of background materials to inform the panel’s deliberations. Jamie Casey conducted the panel’s review of websites of 47 major re- search institutions to determine their guidance and policies for review of research protocols involving human participants, tracked down of- ten obscure materials for the panel’s use, and assisted the panel at its meetings. Tanya Lee made excellent arrangements for panel meet- ix

ings. Daniel Cork contributed his outstanding typographic skills to the preparation of the report for printing. The panel is especially grateful to Constance Citro, who served as the panel’s study director beginning in May 2002. She insisted that our work reflect the highest standards of evidence and worked unfailingly to uncover sources for that evidence. We draw attention in particular to the synthesis she developed on the evolution of federal guidelines for the protection of human participants in research, which is recounted in Chapter 3. From disparate sources, she developed a coherent and original account of that process. More broadly, with extraordinary dili- gence, she managed the completion of the panel’s work. I want to extend special thanks to Daniel Ilgen, who served as vice chair of the panel. He assumed the role despite a lengthy list of other commitments. He listened to our deliberations and crafted arguments noteworthy for their clarity. He worked tirelessly with Connie to ensure that our efforts warranted the imprimatur of the National Research Council. All of the panel members made important contributions of their time and expertise, not only bringing to bear examples and perspec- tives from their own specialties, but also engaging in intensive dialogue to reach consensus on key issues for participant protection in SBES re- search. It was an honor to serve with them. The panel also benefited from our two liaison members. William Yost, Loyola University, Chicago, liaison from the Board on Behav- ioral, Cognitive, and Sensory Sciences to our panel, attended all our meetings and provided a very useful perspective to the panel’s deliber- ations. Roderick J.A. Little, University of Michigan, attended our early meetings as liaison from both the IOM committee and the Committee on National Statistics. This report has been reviewed in draft form by individuals chosen for their diverse perspectives and technical expertise, in accordance with procedures approved by the National Research Council’s Report Review Committee. The purpose of this independent review is to pro- vide candid and critical comments that will assist the institution in making its published report as sound as possible and to ensure that the report meets institutional standards for objectivity, evidence, and responsiveness to the study charge. The review comments and draft manuscript remain confidential to protect the integrity of the delibera- tive process. We wish to thank the following individuals for their review of this report: Evan G. DeRenzo, Center for Ethics, Washington Hospital Cen- ter, Washington, DC; Lowell W. Gerson, Office of Addiction Medicine, Northeastern Ohio Universities College of Medicine, Rootstown, OH; x

Jeff Kahn, Center for Bioethics, University of Minnesota; Richard A. Kulka, Research Triangle Institute, Research Triangle Park, NC; Rod- erick J.A. Little, Department of Biostatistics, University of Michigan; Richard E. Nisbett, Culture and Cognition Program and Department of Psychology, University of Michigan; Lee N. Robins, Department of Psychiatry, Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, MO; and Joan E. Sieber, Department of Psychology, California State Univer- sity, Hayward. Although the reviewers listed above have provided many construc- tive comments and suggestions, they were not asked to endorse the conclusions or recommendations nor did they see the final draft of the report before its release. The review of this report was overseen by Henry W. Riecken, Behavioral Sciences, University of Pennsylvania, and Mary Jane Osborn, Department of Microbiology, University of Con- necticut Health Center. Appointed by the National Research Council, they were responsible for making certain that an independent exami- nation of this report was carried out in accordance with institutional procedures and that all review comments were carefully considered. Responsibility for the final content of this report rests entirely with the authoring committee and the institution. Cora B. Marrett, Chair Panel on Institutional Review Boards, Surveys, and Social Science Research xi

Contents Executive Summary 1 Panel Charge and Scope 1 Enhancing Informed Consent 2 Enhancing Confidentiality Protection 4 Effective Review of Minimal-Risk Research 5 Needed Information 7 System-Level Issues 7 1 Introduction 9 The Issues 10 Panel Charge and Scope 11 Activities 14 Organization of Report 15 2 Basic Concepts 23 Principles and Practices for Ethical Research 23 Harms, Risks, and Benefits 26 Minimal Risk 31 Role of IRBs 35 SBES Research 43 Conclusion 53 3 Regulatory History 59 From 1945 to 1966 60 From 1966 to 1974 61 From 1974 to 1981 64 From 1981 to 1991 73 Developments Since 1991 74 Conclusion 79 4 Enhancing Informed Consent 81 IRB Focus on Informed Consent 86 Research to Improve Consent Procedures 93 Informed Consent for Special Populations 94 Third-Party Consent 98 Waiving Written Consent 101 xiii

Omitting Elements of Informed Consent 108 Conclusion 111 5 Enhancing Confidentiality Protection 113 History of Confidentiality Protection in the Participant Protection System 115 Confidentiality Protection in the Federal Statistical System 119 Protecting Confidentiality Today 123 The Role of Researchers, IRBs, OHRP and Funding Agencies , in Protecting Confidentiality 133 A Confidentiality Protection System for Public-Use Microdata 138 Concluding Note: Minimal Disclosure Risk is Not Zero Risk 140 6 Enhancing the Effectiveness of Review: Minimal-Risk Research 143 Guidance on the Review Process 144 Guidance for Initial Review 146 Continuing Review 157 Documenting Risks and Harms 159 Ongoing Data System 160 In-Depth Studies 163 7 System Issues 165 Guidance and Support for IRBs 166 Qualifications and Performance Standards 168 Communication Among IRBs and Researchers 171 Organization of and Among IRBs 175 Developing National Policy for Human Research Participant Protection 178 Continuing System Evolution 180 References 183 Appendices 191 A Tracing Changes in Regulatory Language 193 B Selected Organizations and Resources for Human Research Participant Protection 217 C Agenda for Panel’s First Meeting 221 D Selected Studies of IRB Operations: Summary Descriptions 225 xiv

E Confidentiality and Data Access Issues for Institutional Review Boards George T. Duncan 235 Introduction 235 Critical Issues 236 Tension Between Disclosure Risk and Data Utility 242 Conclusions 247 References and Bibliography 247 Biographical Sketches of Panel Members and Staff 253 xv

List of Figures 2-1 Types of Possible Harm Anticipated by Investigators for Protocols, by Type of Research 29 2-2 Average Reviews by IRBs in Each Decile of Workload Volume, 1995 37 2-3 SBES and Biomedical Protocols by Type of Method Used 46 6-1 Boxplots for Hypothetical Proportion of Expedited Reviews Across IRBs 163 xvi

List of Boxes 1-1 Key Features of the Common Rule 17 1-2 Categories of Research for Which Minimal-Risk Protocols Can Receive Expedited Review 20 2-1 Laboratory Experiment Examples 48 2-2 Field Experiment Examples 49 2-3 Natural Behavior Observation Examples 51 2-4 Unstructured or Semistructured Interview Examples 54 2-5 Structured Interview (Sample Survey) Examples 56 2-6 Secondary Analysis Examples 57 3-1 Examples of Ethically Troubling SBES Research from the 1970s 66 3-2 SBES Concerns in the 1970s 68 4-1 Basic Elements of Informed Consent 82 4-2 Additional Elements of Informed Consent and Provisions for Waiver or Alteration 84 4-3 Documentation of Consent and Waiver Conditions 85 5-1 Health and Retirement Survey Design and Content 126 A-1 Applicability of IRB Regulations 194 A-2 Definition of Research 195 A-3 Definition of Human Subject 196 A-4 Research Eligible for Exemption 197 A-5 Expedited Review (SBES-Related Categories) 200 A-6 Criteria for IRB Review 203 A-7 Basic Elements of Informed Consent 206 A-8 Additional Elements of Informed Consent 209 A-9 Conditions for Waiver of Informed Consent 211 A-10 Documentation of Informed Consent and Waiver Conditions 213 A-11 Definition of Minimal Risk 216 xvii

Next: Executive Summary »
Protecting Participants and Facilitating Social and Behavioral Sciences Research Get This Book
×
Buy Paperback | $39.00
MyNAP members save 10% online.
Login or Register to save!
Download Free PDF

Institutional review boards (IRBs) are the linchpins of the protection systems that govern human participation in research. In recent years, high-profile cases have focused attention on the weaknesses of the procedures for protecting participants in medical research. The issues surrounding participants protection in the social, behavioral, and economic sciences may be less visible to the public eye, but they are no less important in ensuring ethical and responsible research.

This report examines three key issues related to human participation in social, behavioral, and economic sciences research: (1) obtaining informed, voluntary consent from prospective participants: (2) guaranteeing the confidentiality of information collected from participants, which is a particularly challenging problem in social sciences research; and (3) using appropriate review procedures for “minimal-risk” research.

Protecting Participants and Facilitating Social and Behavioral Sciences Research will be important to policy makers, research administrators, research sponsors, IRB members, and investigators. More generally, it contains important information for all who want to ensure the best protection—for participants and researchers alike—in the social, behavioral, and economic sciences.

  1. ×

    Welcome to OpenBook!

    You're looking at OpenBook, NAP.edu's online reading room since 1999. Based on feedback from you, our users, we've made some improvements that make it easier than ever to read thousands of publications on our website.

    Do you want to take a quick tour of the OpenBook's features?

    No Thanks Take a Tour »
  2. ×

    Show this book's table of contents, where you can jump to any chapter by name.

    « Back Next »
  3. ×

    ...or use these buttons to go back to the previous chapter or skip to the next one.

    « Back Next »
  4. ×

    Jump up to the previous page or down to the next one. Also, you can type in a page number and press Enter to go directly to that page in the book.

    « Back Next »
  5. ×

    To search the entire text of this book, type in your search term here and press Enter.

    « Back Next »
  6. ×

    Share a link to this book page on your preferred social network or via email.

    « Back Next »
  7. ×

    View our suggested citation for this chapter.

    « Back Next »
  8. ×

    Ready to take your reading offline? Click here to buy this book in print or download it as a free PDF, if available.

    « Back Next »
Stay Connected!