Literature DB >> 12691696

Qualitative methods in end-of-life research: recommendations to enhance the protection of human subjects.

Barbara A Koenig1, Anthony L Back, LaVera M Crawley.   

Abstract

Qualitative research has the potential to contribute important new knowledge to care near the end of life, but research is often hampered by questions about how best to protect dying patients and their family members who serve as research subjects. Due to lack of familiarity with the techniques of ethnographic or observational research, as well as concerns about the vulnerability of the dying, members of Institutional Review Boards (IRBs) are often unable to evaluate the benefits and potential harms of studies. In addition, policies derived from standards based on interventional medical research or clinical trials may be applied inappropriately. We offer comprehensive recommendations aimed at improving the translation of human subjects guidelines into meaningful protections for subjects in qualitative studies, including education for IRBs. Policies must be flexible and should be guided by empirical findings documenting the actual impact of research participation, rather than a priori assumptions about patient vulnerability. Sensitive topics, such as drug use, may require added protections.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Biomedical and Behavioral Research

Mesh:

Year:  2003        PMID: 12691696     DOI: 10.1016/s0885-3924(03)00060-5

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Pain Symptom Manage        ISSN: 0885-3924            Impact factor:   3.612


  7 in total

1.  Survey burden for family members surveyed about end-of-life care in the intensive care unit.

Authors:  Erin K Kross; Elizabeth L Nielsen; J Randall Curtis; Ruth A Engelberg
Journal:  J Pain Symptom Manage       Date:  2012-07-03       Impact factor: 3.612

Review 2.  Enacting a theory of caring to recruit and retain vulnerable participants for sensitive research.

Authors:  Karen Kavanaugh; Teresa T Moro; Teresa Savage; Ramkrishna Mehendale
Journal:  Res Nurs Health       Date:  2006-06       Impact factor: 2.228

3.  Burden and benefit of psychosocial research at the end of life.

Authors:  Hayley Pessin; Michele Galietta; Christian J Nelson; Robert Brescia; Barry Rosenfeld; William Breitbart
Journal:  J Palliat Med       Date:  2008-05       Impact factor: 2.947

4.  Ethical and logistical considerations of multicenter parental bereavement research.

Authors:  Kathleen Lynn Meert; Susan Eggly; J Michael Dean; Murray Pollack; Jerry Zimmerman; K J S Anand; Christopher J L Newth; Douglas F Willson; Carol Nicholson
Journal:  J Palliat Med       Date:  2008-04       Impact factor: 2.947

5.  Patient, caregiver, health professional and researcher views and experiences of participating in research at the end of life: a critical interpretive synthesis of the literature.

Authors:  Marjolein H Gysels; Catherine Evans; Irene J Higginson
Journal:  BMC Med Res Methodol       Date:  2012-08-17       Impact factor: 4.615

6.  Is the qualitative research interview an acceptable medium for research with palliative care patients and carers?

Authors:  Marjolein Gysels; Cathy Shipman; Irene J Higginson
Journal:  BMC Med Ethics       Date:  2008-04-24       Impact factor: 2.652

7.  Considerations and recommendations for conducting qualitative research interviews with palliative and end-of-life care patients in the home setting: a consensus paper.

Authors:  Stephanie Sivell; Hayley Prout; Noreen Hopewell-Kelly; Jessica Baillie; Anthony Byrne; Michelle Edwards; Emily Harrop; Simon Noble; Catherine Sampson; Annmarie Nelson
Journal:  BMJ Support Palliat Care       Date:  2015-12-08       Impact factor: 3.568

  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.