Cargando…

How ethics committees and requirements are structuring health research in the Philippines: a qualitative study

BACKGROUND: The last few decades have seen the rising global acknowledgment of the importance of ethics in the conduct of health research. But research ethics committees or institutional review boards (IRBs) have also been criticized for being barriers to research. This article examines the case of...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Lasco, Gideon, Yu, Vincen Gregory, Palileo-Villanueva, Lia
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8246435/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34210301
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12910-021-00653-z
_version_ 1783716311219568640
author Lasco, Gideon
Yu, Vincen Gregory
Palileo-Villanueva, Lia
author_facet Lasco, Gideon
Yu, Vincen Gregory
Palileo-Villanueva, Lia
author_sort Lasco, Gideon
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: The last few decades have seen the rising global acknowledgment of the importance of ethics in the conduct of health research. But research ethics committees or institutional review boards (IRBs) have also been criticized for being barriers to research. This article examines the case of the Philippines, where little has been done to interrogate the health research and IRB culture, and whose circumstances can serve as reflection points for other low- and middle-income countries. METHODS: Semi-structured interviews were conducted from July to October 2020 to elicit health researchers’ perspectives and experiences regarding IRBs and the ethics approval process in the country, as well as counterpoint narratives from researchers who have also worked for IRBs. RESULTS: Across the fields of clinical, public health, and social science research, the issue of ethics review revealed itself to be foremost an issue of inequity. IRB processes serve as a barrier for those outside the academe; those belonging to institutions, cities, or entire regions without their own accredited IRBs; and researchers working independently, without ample budget, or on highly specialized topics—more so for non-clinical researchers who must grapple with the primarily biomedical framework of most IRBs. Consequently, the research landscape invariably favors those with the resources to do research, and researches that tend to attract funding. CONCLUSION: The broader challenge of equity in health research will entail more fundamental reforms, but proximal interventions can be done to make the ethics approval process more equitable, such as enhancing institutional oversight, regulating IRB fees, and enabling a more supportive and welcoming environment for early-career, student, independent, and non-clinical health researchers. This article ends by reflecting on the implications of our findings toward the larger research culture. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12910-021-00653-z.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8246435
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-82464352021-07-01 How ethics committees and requirements are structuring health research in the Philippines: a qualitative study Lasco, Gideon Yu, Vincen Gregory Palileo-Villanueva, Lia BMC Med Ethics Research BACKGROUND: The last few decades have seen the rising global acknowledgment of the importance of ethics in the conduct of health research. But research ethics committees or institutional review boards (IRBs) have also been criticized for being barriers to research. This article examines the case of the Philippines, where little has been done to interrogate the health research and IRB culture, and whose circumstances can serve as reflection points for other low- and middle-income countries. METHODS: Semi-structured interviews were conducted from July to October 2020 to elicit health researchers’ perspectives and experiences regarding IRBs and the ethics approval process in the country, as well as counterpoint narratives from researchers who have also worked for IRBs. RESULTS: Across the fields of clinical, public health, and social science research, the issue of ethics review revealed itself to be foremost an issue of inequity. IRB processes serve as a barrier for those outside the academe; those belonging to institutions, cities, or entire regions without their own accredited IRBs; and researchers working independently, without ample budget, or on highly specialized topics—more so for non-clinical researchers who must grapple with the primarily biomedical framework of most IRBs. Consequently, the research landscape invariably favors those with the resources to do research, and researches that tend to attract funding. CONCLUSION: The broader challenge of equity in health research will entail more fundamental reforms, but proximal interventions can be done to make the ethics approval process more equitable, such as enhancing institutional oversight, regulating IRB fees, and enabling a more supportive and welcoming environment for early-career, student, independent, and non-clinical health researchers. This article ends by reflecting on the implications of our findings toward the larger research culture. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12910-021-00653-z. BioMed Central 2021-07-01 /pmc/articles/PMC8246435/ /pubmed/34210301 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12910-021-00653-z Text en © The Author(s) 2021 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) . The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) ) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.
spellingShingle Research
Lasco, Gideon
Yu, Vincen Gregory
Palileo-Villanueva, Lia
How ethics committees and requirements are structuring health research in the Philippines: a qualitative study
title How ethics committees and requirements are structuring health research in the Philippines: a qualitative study
title_full How ethics committees and requirements are structuring health research in the Philippines: a qualitative study
title_fullStr How ethics committees and requirements are structuring health research in the Philippines: a qualitative study
title_full_unstemmed How ethics committees and requirements are structuring health research in the Philippines: a qualitative study
title_short How ethics committees and requirements are structuring health research in the Philippines: a qualitative study
title_sort how ethics committees and requirements are structuring health research in the philippines: a qualitative study
topic Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8246435/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34210301
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12910-021-00653-z
work_keys_str_mv AT lascogideon howethicscommitteesandrequirementsarestructuringhealthresearchinthephilippinesaqualitativestudy
AT yuvincengregory howethicscommitteesandrequirementsarestructuringhealthresearchinthephilippinesaqualitativestudy
AT palileovillanuevalia howethicscommitteesandrequirementsarestructuringhealthresearchinthephilippinesaqualitativestudy