Assessing Institutional Ethics Committees in India Using the IRB-RAT

Abstract

Institutional ethics committees (IECs) are currently still in their infancy in low- to middle-income countries (LMICs), which may have important implications with regard to the oversight of the protection of human participants. Understanding how these IECs currently function is a critical first step in helping LMICs build infrastructures that support the protection of research participants and improve the scientific quality of health research worldwide. We assessed the functioning of the IECs at two medical colleges in Gujarat, India, by administering the Institutional Review Board Researcher’s Assessment Tool (IRB-RAT) to 42 IEC and faculty members. The IRB-RAT includes eight scales assessing various domains related to how investigators and members perceive their ethics committees. Results from t tests revealed significant differences between ideal ratings and descriptive ratings on each of the IRB-RAT scales with ideal ratings being higher than current descriptive ratings on all of the scales (<.001). These findings suggest areas that can be targeted for improvement and also provide important information about the values of Indian IECs.

Keywords

research ethics ethics committees review boards low- to middle-income countries

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Abbott

Grady

(2011). A systematic review of the empirical literature evaluating IRBs: What we know and what we still need to learn. Journal of Empirical Research on Human Research Ethics, 6(1), 3-19.

Campbell

E. G.

Weissman

J. S.

Clarridge

Yucel

Causino

Blumenthal

(2003). Characteristics of medical school faculty members serving on institutional review boards: Results of a national survey. Academic Medicine, 78, 831-836.

Caniza

M. A.

Clara

Maron

Navarro-Marin

Rivera

Howard

S. C.

. . . Barfield

R. C.

(2006). Establishment of ethical oversight of human research in El Salvador: Lessons learned. Lancet Oncology, 7, 1027-1033.

Dent

N. J.

Krishan

(2008). Ethics committees in India. Quality Assurance Journal, 11, 143-150.

Dhai

(2005). Module five: Implementation of ethics review. Developing World Bioethics, 5, 73-91. doi:10.1111/j.1471-8847.2005.00103.x

European Forum for Good Clinical Practice. (2009). Report on data on research ethics committee in seven research countries outside Europe. Retrieved from http://www.efgcp.be/Downloads/Library/EFGCP%20-%20NRES%20Report%20on%20RECs%20Vol%202%202%20PP.pdf

Falusi

A. G.

Olopade

O. I.

Olopade

C. O.

(2007). Establishment of a standing ethics/institutional review board in a Nigerian University: A blueprint for developing countries. Journal of Empirical Research on Human Research Ethics, 2, 21-30.

Indian Council of Medical Research. (2006). Ethical guidelines for biomedical research on human participants. New Delhi, India: Author. Retrieved from http://icmr.nic.in/ethical_guidelines.pdf

Kadam

Karandikar

(2012). Ethics committees in India: Facing the challenges! Perspectives in Clinical Research, 3, 50-56.

10.

Kass

N. E.

Hyder

A. A.

Ajuwon

Appiah-Poku

Barsdorf

Elsayed

D. E.

. . . Tindana

(2007). The structure and function of research ethics committees in Africa: A case study. PLoS Medicine, 4, 26-31.

11.

Keith-Spiegel

Koocher

G. P.

(2005). Institutional review board researchers assessment tool. Boston Children’s Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Boson, MA.

12.

Keith-Spiegel

Koocher

G. P.

Tabachnick

(2006). What scientists want from their research ethics committee. Journal of Empirical Research on Human Research Ethics: An International Journal, 1, 67-82.

13.

Klitchman

(2008). Views of the process and content of ethical reviews of HIV vaccine trials among members of US institutional review boards and South African research ethics committees. Developing World Bioethics, 8, 207-218.

14.

Kumar

Ravindran

G. D.

Bhan

Srivastava

J. S.

Nair

V. M.

(2008). The India experience. Journal of Academic Ethics, 6, 295-303.

15.

Larson

H. J.

Brocard

Garnett

(2010). The India HPV-vaccine suspension. The Lancet, 376, 572-573.

16.

Louw

Delport

(2006). Contextual challenges in South Africa: The role of a research ethics committee. Journal of Academic Ethics, 4(1-4), 39-60.

17.

Matar

(2013). Perspectives of Egyptian research ethics committees regarding their effective functioning. Journal of Empirical Research Ethics, 8, 32-44.

18.

Muthuswamy

(2005). Status of ethical review and challenges in India. Indian Pediatrics, 42, 1189-1190.

19.

Reeser

J. C.

Austin

D. M.

Jaros

L. M.

Mukesh

B. N.

McCarty

C. A.

(2008). Investigating perceived institutional review board quality and function using the IRB researcher assessment tool. Journal of Empirical Research on Human Research Ethics, 3, 25-34.

20.

Sheikh

(2008). The Pakistan experience. Journal of Academic Ethics, 6, 283-287.

21.

Singh

(2009). Procedures and operations of the institutional ethics committee in public sector hospitals in Delhi, India. Indian Journal of Medical Research, 130, 568-569.

22.

Sorta-Bilajac

(2004). Indian bioethics: The issue of female foeticide and infanticide. A Sikh perspective. Ethics & Politics, VI, 1-8.

23.

Tindana

Boateng

(2008). The Ghana experience. Journal of Academic Ethics, 6, 277-281.

24.

Yaghoobi

(2011). Theoretical shortcomings of institutional review boards and possible solutions. Archives of Iranian Medicine, 14, 202-203.