Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Ethical, regulatory, and practical barriers to COVID-19 research: A stakeholder-informed inventory of concerns.
Sisk, Bryan A; Baldwin, Kari; Parsons, Meredith; DuBois, James M.
  • Sisk BA; Division of Hematology/Oncology, Department of Pediatrics, Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, Missouri, United State of America.
  • Baldwin K; Division of General Medical Sciences, Bioethics Research Center, Department of Medicine, Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, Missouri, United States of America.
  • Parsons M; Division of General Medical Sciences, Bioethics Research Center, Department of Medicine, Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, Missouri, United States of America.
  • DuBois JM; Division of General Medical Sciences, Bioethics Research Center, Department of Medicine, Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, Missouri, United States of America.
PLoS One ; 17(3): e0265252, 2022.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1759952
ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION:

SARS-CoV-2 (COVID-19) has caused death and economic injury around the globe. The urgent need for COVID-19 research created new ethical, regulatory, and practical challenges. The next public health emergency could be worse than COVID-19. We must learn about these challenges from the experiences of researchers and Research Ethics Committee professionals responsible for these COVID-19 studies to prepare for the next emergency. MATERIALS AND

METHODS:

We conducted an online survey to identify the ethical, oversight, and regulatory challenges of conducting COVID-19 research during the early pandemic, and proposed solutions for overcoming these barriers. Using criterion-based, convenience sampling, we invited researchers who proposed or conducted COVID-19 research to complete an anonymous, online survey about their experiences. We administered a separate but related survey to Institutional Review Board (IRB) professionals who reviewed COVID-19 research studies. The surveys included open-ended and demographic items. We performed inductive content analysis on responses to open-ended survey questions.

RESULTS:

IRB professionals (n = 143) and researchers (n = 211) described 19 types of barriers to COVID-19 research, related to 5 overarching categories policy and regulatory, biases and misperceptions, institutional and inter-institutional conflicts, risks of harm, and pressure of the pandemic. Researchers and IRB professionals described 8 categories of adaptations and solutions to these challenges enacting technological solutions; developing protocol-based solutions; disposition and team management; establishing and communicating appropriate standards; national guidance and leadership; maintaining high standards; prioritizing studies before IRB review; and identifying and incorporating experts. DISCUSSION AND

CONCLUSIONS:

This inventory of challenges represents ongoing barriers to studying the current pandemic, and they represent a risk to research during future public health emergencies. Delays in studies of a pandemic during a pandemic threatens the health and safety of the public. We urge the development of a national working group to address these issues before the next public health emergency arises.
Subject(s)

Full text: Available Collection: International databases Database: MEDLINE Main subject: COVID-19 Type of study: Observational study / Prognostic study / Qualitative research Limits: Humans Language: English Journal: PLoS One Journal subject: Science / Medicine Year: 2022 Document Type: Article

Similar

MEDLINE

...
LILACS

LIS


Full text: Available Collection: International databases Database: MEDLINE Main subject: COVID-19 Type of study: Observational study / Prognostic study / Qualitative research Limits: Humans Language: English Journal: PLoS One Journal subject: Science / Medicine Year: 2022 Document Type: Article