This commentary briefly reviews the ethical considerations for protection of workers participating in research. We argue that many IRBs may not fully understand the nature of collaborative and participatory research methods; consequently, this may delay IRB approval or worse, reduce the effectiveness of IRB oversight. A U.S. workplace participatory action research (PAR) project with which we are involved illustrates how researcher-worker-employer teams can navigate human subject oversight procedures (IRB approval). By design, successful and effective PAR projects incorporate, and often exceed the ethical principles espoused by current IRB principles.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
LilienfeldD. E., The silence: The asbestos industry and early occupational cancer research—A case study, American Journal of Public Health, 81 (6), pp. 791–800, 1991.
2.
EgilmanD. S. and HomC. M., Corruption of the medical literature: A second visit. American Journal of Industrial Medicine, 34, pp. 401–404, 1998.
3.
SchuchmanM., Secrecy in science: The flock worker's lung investigation. Annals of Internal Medicine, 129 (4), pp. 341–344, 1998.
4.
National Bioethics Advisory Commission, NBAC facts—Ethical and policy issues in research involving human participants, National Bioethics Advisory Commission, Bethesda, MD, 1999.
5.
RothsteinM., Ethical guidelines for medical research on workers. Journal of Occupational and Environmental Medicine, 42 (12), pp. 1166–1171, 2000.
6.
RestK., Ethics in occupational and environmental health, in: LevyB. and WegmanD. (eds.), Occupational health: Recognizing and preventing work-related disease and injury, Lippincott Williams and Wilkins, Philadelphia, PA, 2000.
7.
Belmont report, 1979.
8.
SandmanP., Emerging communication responsibilities of epidemiologists. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 44S (Suppl 1), pp. 41S–50S, 1991.
9.
SchulteP. A., Ethical issues in the communication of results. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 44 (Suppl 1), pp. 57S–61S, 1991.
10.
LemkauJ. P.AhmedS. M., and CauleyK., The history of health in Dayton: A community-academic partnership: Community members help researchers define priorities, resolve ethical issues, refine procedures, and interpret results. American Journal of Public Health, 90, pp. 1216–1217, 2000.
