BACKGROUND: Human subjects protection in healthcare contexts rests on the premise that a principled boundary distinguishes clinical research and clinical practice. However, growing use of evidence-based clinical practices by health systems makes it increasingly difficult to disentangle research from a wide range of clinical activities that are sometimes called "research on medical practice" (ROMP), including quality improvement activities and comparative effectiveness research. The recent growth of ROMP activities has created an ethical and regulatory gray zone with significant implications for the oversight of human subjects research. METHODS: We conducted six semi-structured, open-ended focus group discussions with IRB members to understand their experiences and perspectives on ethical oversight of ROMP, including randomization of patients to standard treatments. RESULTS: Our study revealed that IRB members are unclear or divided on the central questions at stake in the current policy debate over ethical oversight of ROMP: IRB members struggle to make a clear distinction between clinical research and medical practice improvement, lack consensus on when ROMP requires IRB review and oversight, and are uncertain about what constitutes incremental risk when patients are randomized to different treatments, any of which may be offered in usual care. They characterized the central challenge as a balancing act, between, on the one hand, making information fully transparent to patients and providing adequate oversight, and on the other hand, avoiding a chilling effect on the research process or harming the physician-patient relationship. CONCLUSIONS: Evidence-based guidance that supports IRB members in providing adequate and effective oversight of ROMP without impeding the research process or harming the physician-patient relationship is necessary to realize the full benefits of the learning health system.
RCT Entities:
BACKGROUND:Human subjects protection in healthcare contexts rests on the premise that a principled boundary distinguishes clinical research and clinical practice. However, growing use of evidence-based clinical practices by health systems makes it increasingly difficult to disentangle research from a wide range of clinical activities that are sometimes called "research on medical practice" (ROMP), including quality improvement activities and comparative effectiveness research. The recent growth of ROMP activities has created an ethical and regulatory gray zone with significant implications for the oversight of human subjects research. METHODS: We conducted six semi-structured, open-ended focus group discussions with IRB members to understand their experiences and perspectives on ethical oversight of ROMP, including randomization of patients to standard treatments. RESULTS: Our study revealed that IRB members are unclear or divided on the central questions at stake in the current policy debate over ethical oversight of ROMP: IRB members struggle to make a clear distinction between clinical research and medical practice improvement, lack consensus on when ROMP requires IRB review and oversight, and are uncertain about what constitutes incremental risk when patients are randomized to different treatments, any of which may be offered in usual care. They characterized the central challenge as a balancing act, between, on the one hand, making information fully transparent to patients and providing adequate oversight, and on the other hand, avoiding a chilling effect on the research process or harming the physician-patient relationship. CONCLUSIONS: Evidence-based guidance that supports IRB members in providing adequate and effective oversight of ROMP without impeding the research process or harming the physician-patient relationship is necessary to realize the full benefits of the learning health system.
Authors: Karine Morin; Herbert Rakatansky; Frank A Riddick; Leonard J Morse; John M O'Bannon; Michael S Goldrich; Priscilla Ray; Matthew Weiss; Robert M Sade; Monique A Spillman Journal: JAMA Date: 2002-01-02 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: Ruth R Faden; Nancy E Kass; Steven N Goodman; Peter Pronovost; Sean Tunis; Tom L Beauchamp Journal: Hastings Cent Rep Date: 2013 Jan-Feb Impact factor: 2.683
Authors: Joanne Lynn; Mary Ann Baily; Melissa Bottrell; Bruce Jennings; Robert J Levine; Frank Davidoff; David Casarett; Janet Corrigan; Ellen Fox; Matthew K Wynia; George J Agich; Margaret O'Kane; Theodore Speroff; Paul Schyve; Paul Batalden; Sean Tunis; Nancy Berlinger; Linda Cronenwett; J Michael Fitzmaurice; Nancy Neveloff Dubler; Brent James Journal: Ann Intern Med Date: 2007-04-16 Impact factor: 25.391
Authors: Rochelle D Jones; Chris Krenz; Michele Gornick; Kent A Griffith; Rebecca Spence; Angela R Bradbury; Raymond De Vries; Sarah T Hawley; Rodney A Hayward; Robin Zon; Sage Bolte; Navid Sadeghi; Richard L Schilsky; Reshma Jagsi Journal: JCO Oncol Pract Date: 2020-04-30
Authors: Susan M Wolf; Pilar N Ossorio; Susan A Berry; Henry T Greely; Amy L McGuire; Michelle A Penny; Sharon F Terry Journal: J Law Med Ethics Date: 2020-03 Impact factor: 1.718
Authors: Rochelle D Jones; Chris Krenz; Kent A Griffith; Rebecca Spence; Angela R Bradbury; Raymond De Vries; Sarah T Hawley; Robin Zon; Sage Bolte; Navid Sadeghi; Richard L Schilsky; Reshma Jagsi Journal: JCO Oncol Pract Date: 2021-12-02
Authors: Stephanie R Morain; Ellen Tambor; Rachael Moloney; Nancy E Kass; Sean Tunis; Kristina Hallez; Ruth R Faden Journal: Learn Health Syst Date: 2017-12-05
Authors: Rochelle D Jones; Chris Krenz; Kent A Griffith; Rebecca Spence; Angela R Bradbury; Raymond De Vries; Sarah T Hawley; Robin Zon; Sage Bolte; Navid Sadeghi; Richard L Schilsky; Reshma Jagsi Journal: JCO Oncol Pract Date: 2020-10-23
Authors: Susan M Wolf; Laura M Amendola; Jonathan S Berg; Wendy K Chung; Ellen Wright Clayton; Robert C Green; Julie Harris-Wai; Gail E Henderson; Gail P Jarvik; Barbara A Koenig; Lisa Soleymani Lehmann; Amy L McGuire; Pearl O'Rourke; Carol Somkin; Benjamin S Wilfond; Wylie Burke Journal: Genet Med Date: 2017-08-31 Impact factor: 8.822
Authors: Joseph E Andrews; J Brian Moore; Richard B Weinberg; Mysha Sissine; Sabina Gesell; Jacquie Halladay; Wayne Rosamond; Cheryl Bushnell; Sara Jones; Paula Means; Nancy M P King; Diana Omoyeni; Pamela W Duncan Journal: J Med Ethics Date: 2018-05-02 Impact factor: 2.903