Community groups are implementing research ethics review processes to determine whether and how research is conducted in their communities. We report on a survey of 109 of these community-based review processes about their relationships with institution-based research ethics boards (I-REBs). Ninety-two percent reported that studies they review were also reviewed by an I-REB. Over half characterized their relationship with I-REBs positively. Those with positive relationships were significantly more likely to communicate with the involved I-REBs. Challenges when working with I-REBs included delays, communication problems, and lack of I-REB understanding of community-based participatory research. Strengthening relationships between community-based review processes and I-REBs could ultimately enhance reviews of community-engaged research.
BakemanR. & GottmanJ. M. (1986). Observing interactions: An introduction to sequential analysis. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
2.
BallJ. & JanystP. (2008). Enacting research ethics in partnerships with indigenous communities in Canada: “Do it in a good way.”Journal of Empirical Research on Human Research Ethics, 3(2), 33–52.
BrownP.Morello-FroschJ. G.AltmanGasior R.RudelR.SeinierL.PerezC., & SimpsonR. (2010). Institutional review board challenges related to community-based participatory research on human exposure to environmental toxins: A case study. Environmental Health, 9, 39.
7.
Community-Campus Partnerships for Health. (2007). Educational Conference Call Series on Institutional Review Boards and Ethical Issues in Research. Retrieved August 13, 2010 from http://depts.washington.edu/ccph/irbcalls2.html#1.
8.
Community-Campus Partnerships for Health. (2009–2010). Educational Conference Call Series on Building Community Capacity for Research. Retrieved January 7, 2011 from http://www.ccph.info.
9.
FlickerS.TraversR.GutaA.McDonaldS., & MeagherA. (2007). Ethical dilemmas in community-based participatory research: Recommendations for Institutional Review Boards. Journal of Urban Health, 84(4), 469–471.
10.
GrignonJ.WongK., & SeiferS. (2008). Ensuring community-level research protections. Proceedings of the 2007 Educational Conference Call Series on Institutional Review Boards and Ethical Issues in Research. Seattle, WA: Community-Campus Partnerships for Health.
11.
IRB/REB Workgroup on Community-Engaged Research. (2009). IRB/REB curriculum on ethical considerations in community-engaged research. Working Draft. Seattle, WA: Community-Campus Partnerships for Health.
12.
IsraelB.SchulzA.ParkerE., & BeckerA. (1998). Review of community-based research: Assessing partnership approaches to improve public health. Annual Review of Public Health, 19, 173–202.
13.
JacklinK. & KinoshamegP. (2008). Developing a participatory aboriginal health research project: “Only if it's going to mean something.”Journal of Empirical Research on Human Research Ethics, 3(2), 53–67.
14.
McDonaldM.A. (2009). Practicing community-engaged research (IRB module). Duke Center for Community Research, Duke Translational Medicine Institute, Duke University. Retrieved January 7, 2011 from http://cfm.mc.duke.edu/modules/cfm_resrc/index.php?id=1.
OnehaM. F. & BeckhamS. (2004). Re-examining community based research protocols. Pacific Public Health, 11(1), 102–106.
17.
QuinnS. C. (2004). Ethics in public health research: Protecting human subjects: The role of community advisory boards. American Journal of Public Health, 94(6), 918–922.
18.
RossL.LoupA.NelsonR.BotkinJ.KostR.SmithG., & GehlertS. (2010). Human subjects protection in community-engaged research: A research ethics framework. Journal of Empirical Research on Human Research Ethics, 5(1), 19–31.
19.
SchulzA. J.KriegerJ., & GaleaS. (2002). Addressing social determinants of health: Community-based participatory approaches to research and practice. Health Education and Behavior, 29(3), 287–295.
SeiferS. D.MichaelsM., & CollinsS. (2010). Applying community-based participatory research principles and approaches in clinical trials: Forging a new model for cancer clinical research. Progress in Community Health Partnerships: Research, Education, and Action, 4(1), 37–46.
ShoreN. (2006). Re-conceptualizing the Belmont Report: A community-based participatory research perspective. Journal of Community Practice, 14(4), 5–26.
24.
ShoreN.BrazuaskasR.DrewE.WongK. A.MoyL.BadenA. C.CyrK.UlevicusJ., & SeiferS. D. (2010). Understanding community-based processes for research ethics review: A national study. American Journal of Public Health. Published online ahead of print December 16, 2010: e1–e6. doi:10.2105/AJPH.2010.194340.
25.
StraussA. & CorbinJ. (1998). Basics of qualitative research: Techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory (2nd ed.). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
26.
StraussR. P.SenguptaS.QuinnS. C.GoeppingerJ.SpauldingC.KegelesS. M., & MillettG. (2001). The role of community advisory boards: Involving communities in the informed consent process. American Journal of Public Health, 91(12), 1938–1943.
27.
TraversR. (2006). Proposal for an ethics review board of community-based HIV/AIDS research in Ontario, an OHTN Position Paper. Ontario HIV Treatment Network: Toronto, ON.
28.
WatkinsB. X.ShepardP. M., & Corbin–MarkC. D. (2009). Completing the circle: A model for effective community review of environmental health research. American Journal of Public Health, 99(S3), S567–577.
