The Views of Quality Improvement Professionals and Comparative Effectiveness Researchers on Ethics, IRBs, and Oversight
- 23 February 2015
- journal article
- research article
- Published by SAGE Publications in Journal of Empirical Research on Human Research Ethics
- Vol. 10 (2), 132-144
- https://doi.org/10.1177/1556264615571558
Abstract
Recently, there have been increasing numbers of activities labeled as either quality improvement (QI) or comparative effectiveness research (CER), both of which are designed to learn what works and what does not in routine clinical care settings. These activities can create confusion for researchers, Institutional Review Board members, and other stakeholders as they try to determine which activities or components of activities constitute clinical practices and which constitute clinical research requiring ethical oversight and informed consent. We conducted a series of semi-structured focus groups with QI and CER professionals to understand their experiences and views of the ethical and regulatory challenges that exist as well as the formal or informal practices and criteria they and their institutions use to address these issues. We found that most participants have experienced challenges related to the ethical oversight of QI and CER activities, and many believe that current regulatory criteria for distinguishing clinical practice from clinical research requiring ethical oversight are confusing. Instead, many participants described other criteria that they believe are more ethically appropriate. Many also described developing formal or informal practices at their institutions to navigate which activities require ethical oversight. However, these local solutions do not completely resolve the issues caused by the blurring of clinical practice and clinical research, raising the question of whether more foundational regulatory changes are needed.Keywords
This publication has 17 references indexed in Scilit:
- Informed Consent, Comparative Effectiveness, and Learning Health CareThe New England Journal of Medicine, 2014
- Ethics and Informed Consent for Comparative Effectiveness Research With Prospective Electronic Clinical DataMedical Care, 2013
- An Ethics Framework for a Learning Health Care System: A Departure from Traditional Research Ethics and Clinical EthicsHastings Center Report, 2013
- The Research‐Treatment Distinction: A Problematic Approach for Determining Which Activities Should Have Ethical OversightHastings Center Report, 2013
- Addressing Low-Risk Comparative Effectiveness Research in Proposed Changes to US Federal Regulations Governing ResearchJAMA, 2012
- The historical foundations of the research-practice distinction in bioethicsTheoretical Medicine and Bioethics, 2012
- Controversy and Quality Improvement: Lingering Questions About Ethics, Oversight, and Patient Safety ResearchThe Joint Commission Journal on Quality and Patient Safety, 2008
- Special Report: The Ethics of Using QI Methods to Improve Health Care Quality and SafetyHastings Center Report, 2006
- The Quality Improvement–Research Divide and the Need for External OversightAmerican Journal of Public Health, 2001
- Determining When Quality Improvement Initiatives Should Be Considered ResearchJAMA, 2000