Online Program

Role of community irbs and research review committees in ensuring the ethics and integrity of CBPR

Tuesday, November 5, 2013

Sarena D. Seifer, MD, Community Campus Partnerships for Health, Seattle, WA
John Cooks, Galveston Island Community Research Advisory Committee, Houston, TX
Elaine Drew, PhD, Department of Population Health, Medical College of Wisconsin, Milwaukee, WI
Elmer Freeman, MSW, PhD(c), Center for Community Health Education Research and Service, Boston, MA
Mei-Ling Isaacs, MPH, Papa Ola Lokahi, Honolulu, HI
Alice Park, MPH, Community-Campus Partnerships for Health, Seattle, WA
Lola Santos, Guam Communications Network, Long Beach, CA
Nancy Shore, PhD, School of Social Work, University of New England, Seattle, WA
Eric Wat, MA, Special Service for Groups, Los Angeles, CA
Introduction: To ensure the ethics and integrity of the research in which they and their communities are engaged, a growing number of community groups have developed their own research ethic review processes that operate independently or in conjunction with institution-based Institutional Review Board (IRBs). Our prior study identified 109 community groups across the U.S. with such processes in place. Our current national collaborative study seeks to document the actual contributions they make to ensuring the ethics and integrity of community-based participatory research (CBPR).

Approach: We analyzed data obtained through structured interviews, focus groups and reviews of documents from 2 community IRBs and 3 community-based research review committees. We also interviewed community and academic members of teams whose research protocols were reviewed by one of the 5 community-based processes in our study as well as an institution-based IRB.

Results: Case studies of 5 community-based research review processes reveal how their reviews differ from those conducted by institution-based IRBs, demonstrate their contributions to assuring the ethics and integrity of CBPR, and describe their operational features and resource requirements. Cross-case study analyses identify promising practices and recommendations for community groups, researchers, institution-based IRBs, funding agencies and policy makers.

Discussion: Our study findings uncover the actual contributions that community IRBs and community-based research review committees make in ensuring the ethics and integrity of CBPR. Our discussion with the audience will focus on ways to support their continued development and enhance their effectiveness and impact.

Learning Areas:

Ethics, professional and legal requirements
Public health or related laws, regulations, standards, or guidelines
Public health or related organizational policy, standards, or other guidelines
Public health or related research

Learning Objectives:
Differentiate between community institution review boards (IRBs), community-based research review committees and institution-based IRBs Discuss the ethical issues that community IRBs identify when they review research protocols Describe the contributions that community IRBs and research review committees make in ensuring the ethics and integrity of CBPR Explain why a community-based organization might want to establish an IRB or research review committee

Keyword(s): Community Research, Ethics

Presenting author's disclosure statement:

Qualified on the content I am responsible for because: I am principal investigator of the NIH grant that is supporting the study being presented and served as PI for the national survey of community IRBs and research review committees that preceded it.
Any relevant financial relationships? No

I agree to comply with the American Public Health Association Conflict of Interest and Commercial Support Guidelines, and to disclose to the participants any off-label or experimental uses of a commercial product or service discussed in my presentation.