What women who use drugs have to say about ethical research: findings of an exploratory qualitative study

Fitting a square peg in a round hole? A mixed-methods study on research ethics and collaborative health and social care research involving 'vulnerable' groups

BACKGROUND

Current research ethics frameworks that oversee health and social care research, in the United Kingdom and internationally, originated in biomedical research, having positivist underpinnings and an orientation towards experimental research. Limitations of these frameworks have been extensively documented including with regard to health and social care research that adopts collaborative approaches. This article contributes to debates about how the research ethics system deals with collaborative research with groups labelled or potentially perceived as vulnerable, and identifies practical recommendations to ensure a better fit between principles and practices of research ethics and those of collaborative research.

METHODS

We conducted a two-round online Delphi study with 35 academic researchers with experience of collaborative research involving vulnerable groups and of seeking research ethics approval in England (United Kingdom), followed by a focus group with eight members of the Delphi panel. The Delphi questionnaire, organised in 12 themes, comprised 66 statements about how researchers experience research ethics review and how the research ethics system could be improved. The focus group discussed the results of the Delphi study to generate practical recommendations.

RESULTS

By the end of the second Delphi round, only one statement relating to the experience of the current research ethics system reached consensus, signalling heterogeneous experiences among researchers working in this field. A total of 32 statements on potential improvements reached consensus. The focus group discussed the 14 Delphi statements with the highest levels of consensus and generated 12 practical recommendations that we grouped into three clusters (1. Endorsing the 'collaborative' dimension of collaborative research; 2. Allowing flexibility; and 3. Strengthening the relational and ongoing nature of ethical research practice).

CONCLUSIONS

This work provides further empirical evidence of how the research ethics system deals with collaborative research involving 'vulnerable' groups. It also offers practical recommendations to ensure that the collaborative dimension of such research receives proper ethical scrutiny, to introduce a degree of flexibility in research ethics processes and supporting documents, and to replace formal, one-off research ethics approvals with ongoing, situated, relational ethical processes and practices.

Community-Engaged Research Ethics Training (CERET): developing accessible and relevant research ethics training for community-based participatory research with people with lived and living experience using illicit drugs and harm reduction workers

BACKGROUND

Community-based participatory research (CBPR) can directly involve non-academic community members in the research process. Existing resources for research ethics training can be inaccessible to team members without an academic background and do not attend to the full spectrum of ethical issues that arise through community-engaged research practices. We detail an approach to capacity building and training in research ethics in the context of CBPR with people who use(d) illicit drugs and harm reduction workers in Vancouver's Downtown Eastside neighborhood.

METHODS

A project team comprised of academic and community experts in CBPR, research ethics, and harm reduction met over five months to develop the Community-Engaged Research Ethics Training (CERET). The group distilled key principles and content from federal research ethics guidelines in Canada, and developed case examples to situate the principles in the context of research with people who use(d) illicit drugs and harm reduction workers. In addition to content related to federal ethics guidelines, the study team integrated additional content related to ethical issues that arise through community-based research, and ethical principles for research in the Downtown Eastside. Workshops were evaluated using a pre-post questionnaire with attendees.

RESULTS

Over the course of six weeks in January-February 2020, we delivered three in-person workshops for twelve attendees, most of whom were onboarding as peer research assistants with a community-based research project. Workshops were structured around key principles of research ethics: respect for persons, concern for welfare, and justice. The discussion-based format we deployed allowed for the bi-directional exchange of information between facilitators and attendees. Evaluation results suggest the CERET approach was effective, and attendees gained confidence and familiarity with workshop content across learning objectives.

CONCLUSIONS

The CERET initiative offers an accessible approach to fulfill institutional requirements while building capacity in research ethics for people who use(d) drugs and harm reduction workers. This approach recognizes community members as partners in ethical decision making throughout the research process and is aligned with values of CBPR. Building capacity around intrinsic and extrinsic dimensions of research ethics can prepare all study team members to attend to ethical issues that arise from CBPR.

Stigma, surveillance, and wounded healing: Promoting a critical ethics of care in research with formerly incarcerated Black women

Black women experience myriad challenges post incarceration, from managing stigma within social relationships to navigating surveillance when interfacing with service systems. It is these challenges that also make them vulnerable participants in community-based research. With many of potential research harms not falling under the guidance of Institutional Review Boards, it is critical to explore how communities experiencing stigma and surveillance perceive their engagement in research. As such, this study explores how 28 justice-involved Black women experience the research process. Findings reveal that participants view the research context as spaces for reflecting on surveillance and stigma in ways that promote self-recovery. Moreover, they perceive the interview process to allow them to envision identities as wounded healers who use their pasts as mechanisms to help others. The study's implications for anti-oppressive inquiry underscore the need for researchers to employ ethical care and justice frameworks that center compassion, reflexivity, and equity throughout the process.

"Every time I tell my story I learn something new": Voice and inclusion in research with Black women with histories of substance use and incarceration

While current ethical procedures aim to minimize risks to imprisoned individuals, there is heightened awareness of the need to protect those who participate in research post-incarceration while under community-based supervision. Formerly incarcerated women, in particular, face myriad challenges to community reintegration which also make them vulnerable participants in research. As such, this study explores how 28 formerly incarcerated Black women experience the qualitative research process. Findings revealed that women engaged in research because these contexts were viewed as therapeutic spaces for raising awareness that can help others. Moreover, the interview process allowed women to share their pasts in ways that promote their recovery from addiction. Participants also reported risks of emotional distress and fears regarding researcher stigma. The implications for trauma-informed interviewing practices underscore the need for greater considerations of the role of the researcher, research environment, and how they contribute to one's personal recovery.

The Ethics of Financial Incentivization for Health Research Participation Among Sex Workers in a Canadian Context

Research incentivization with sex workers is common, yet limited guidance exists for ethical incentives practice. We undertook a critical qualitative inquiry into how researchers (n = 17), community services staff (n = 17), and sex workers participating in research (n = 53) perceive incentives in a Canadian context. We employed an interpretive thematic approach informed by critical perspectives of relational autonomy for analysis. Four themes illustrate how (un)ethical use of incentives is situated in transactional micro-economies among groups experiencing severe marginalization: i) transactional research economy, ii) incentive type: assumptions and effects, iii) incentive amount: too much too little?, and iv) resistance, trauma, and research-related harm. Paternalistic assumptions about capacities of sex workers to act in their own best interests conflicted with participants' rights and abilities for self-determination; with researchers maintaining ultimate decision-making authority. Power differentials create conditions of harm. Safe, equitable approaches concerning research incentive use must redress relations of power that perpetuate oppression.

Testimonies and Healing: Anti-oppressive Research with Black Women and the Implications for Compassionate Ethical Care

Anti-oppressive qualitative inquiry can be a powerful tool for members of marginalized communities to engage in storytelling that is both therapeutic and transformative. For individuals navigating marginalization due to multiple systems of stigmatization, the process of telling their story offers the opportunity to engage in awareness raising and health promotion that can benefit their communities. Formerly incarcerated Black women are one such community experiencing multilevel marginalization. This essay explores ways in which the qualitative interview can provide contexts for women to name their experiences of oppression, reconstruct the meanings they attach to them, and channel their stories of navigating harm to promote the health of others. Given the legacy of research atrocities that have disproportionately harmed already-marginalized communities, this piece seeks to advance practices of ethical care and compassion in qualitative inquiry that promote greater health and the building of relational trust in both research and clinical settings.

Perceptions of HIV Research Participation Among Gay, Bisexual, and Other Men who Have Sex with Men and Transgender and Nonbinary Adults: Results From a Midwest Pride Event

Human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) continues to disproportionately affect gay, bisexual, and other men who have sex with men (GBM) and transgender and nonbinary (trans/NB) individuals. This study investigated attitudes toward participation in HIV survey research, guided by Emanuel's framework for ethical clinical research (e.g., risk-benefit ratio, fair participant selection, respect for participants, social value, and collaborative partnership). GBM (n = 294) and trans/NB (n = 86) persons recruited at a Pride event in Milwaukee completed a survey assessing risks and benefits of participation in, and comfort responding to, sexual health surveys. Participants reported few ethical concerns (e.g., privacy and confidentiality), with notable differences by race, sexual orientation and gender identity, and prior research experiences. Implications for HIV research with GBM and trans/NB individuals are discussed.

Research With Women Who Use Drugs: Applying a Trauma-informed Framework

Women who use drugs (WWUD) experience high rates of trauma. The complex impacts of trauma can act as a barrier to accessing substance use and harm reduction services, and to participation and representation within substance use research. Trauma-informed practice is an evidence-based approach for improved clinical care among WWUD, the principles of which can be applied to substance use research. Many researchers are integrating trauma-informed approaches across research settings, yet these principles are often not referenced specifically within publications, and there is a lack of comprehensive guidance regarding integration of trauma-informed methods across different research designs and methodologies. This commentary describes and discusses the merits of applying the 4 principles of trauma-informed practice - trauma awareness, safety and trustworthiness, choice collaboration and connection, and strengths-based and skills building - to promote safety and inclusion of WWUD in substance use research.

How ethics committees and requirements are structuring health research in the Philippines: a qualitative study

BACKGROUND

The last few decades have seen the rising global acknowledgment of the importance of ethics in the conduct of health research. But research ethics committees or institutional review boards (IRBs) have also been criticized for being barriers to research. This article examines the case of the Philippines, where little has been done to interrogate the health research and IRB culture, and whose circumstances can serve as reflection points for other low- and middle-income countries.

METHODS

Semi-structured interviews were conducted from July to October 2020 to elicit health researchers' perspectives and experiences regarding IRBs and the ethics approval process in the country, as well as counterpoint narratives from researchers who have also worked for IRBs.

RESULTS

Across the fields of clinical, public health, and social science research, the issue of ethics review revealed itself to be foremost an issue of inequity. IRB processes serve as a barrier for those outside the academe; those belonging to institutions, cities, or entire regions without their own accredited IRBs; and researchers working independently, without ample budget, or on highly specialized topics-more so for non-clinical researchers who must grapple with the primarily biomedical framework of most IRBs. Consequently, the research landscape invariably favors those with the resources to do research, and researches that tend to attract funding.

CONCLUSION

The broader challenge of equity in health research will entail more fundamental reforms, but proximal interventions can be done to make the ethics approval process more equitable, such as enhancing institutional oversight, regulating IRB fees, and enabling a more supportive and welcoming environment for early-career, student, independent, and non-clinical health researchers. This article ends by reflecting on the implications of our findings toward the larger research culture.

'This could be my last chance': Therapeutic optimism in a randomised controlled trial for substance use disorders

In randomised controlled trials (RCTs), 'therapeutic optimism' describes a participant's belief they will benefit from the study treatment, despite the express goal of RCTs to test unknown aspects of interventions. Harbouring such expectations may interfere with RCT participation experiences, particularly among marginalised populations, such as people with substance use disorders (PSUD) who may experience social and structural barriers to participation that also increase their vulnerability to therapeutic optimism. However, little research explores therapeutic optimism within substance use trials. Thus, we conducted a nested qualitative study within an RCT testing a treatment for alcohol and opioid use disorders in HIV clinics. Using interviews with 22 participants in Vancouver, Canada, analysis revealed themes relevant to therapeutic optimism, that were specifically linked to intrinsic (e.g. health-related) or extrinsic motivations (e.g. stipend). First, compared to extrinsically motivated participants, intrinsically motivated participants held high expectations for the trial and attributed greater agency to the study medication. Second, intrinsically motivated participants expressing therapeutic optimism anticipated marked changes in their lives from the study/medication. Finally, some participants predicted the treatment would solve substance-related issues in their communities. These findings highlight the interplay between therapeutic optimism and complex interpretations of RCT objectives among PSUD.

Reducing tobacco use among women of childbearing age: Contributions of tobacco regulatory science and tobacco control

Tobacco use has unique, adverse health consequences for reproductive-aged women, particularly should these women become pregnant. Thus, successful efforts to reduce tobacco use among this population have strong potential to improve public health and reduce health disparities. The present review examines contributions to reducing tobacco use among women of childbearing age spanning the domains of tobacco regulatory science and tobacco control from the passage of the Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act in 2009 through September 2019. In the domain of tobacco regulatory science, such efforts include research conducted by various National Institutes of Health/Food and Drug Administration (FDA)-supported Tobacco Centers of Regulatory Science, epidemiological surveillance studies, as well as studies examining the potential impact of tobacco regulatory policies currently under consideration by the FDA (e.g., reduced nicotine content cigarettes, health warning labels). Tobacco control efforts within this same 10-year timeframe include developments in pharmacological and psychosocial approaches to promoting tobacco cessation, mHealth interventions, and tobacco control policy. Emerging issues pertinent to ongoing efforts to reduce tobacco use within the domains of both tobacco regulatory science and tobacco control are also reviewed, including e-cigarettes, comorbid health conditions, course of tobacco and other drugs of abuse, and obstacles to the dissemination and implementation of evidence-based treatment and policy. Although the past decade has seen numerous important contributions to reducing tobacco use among reproductive-aged women within both domains, existing obstacles must be surmounted to continue reducing tobacco use and protecting health among this population. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2020 APA, all rights reserved).

Recognizing the Role of Research Assistants in the Protection of Participants in Vulnerable Circumstances

Little is known about how research assistants (RAs) protect participants in vulnerable circumstances. Using a critical qualitative method informed by feminist ethics, we ran five focus groups with experienced RAs. We identified two themes: (a) expressing moral competencies (subthemes: recognizing power, privilege, and vulnerability; adapting processes and providing support; understanding the sources of moral competencies) and (b) negotiating and making transparent roles and responsibilities (subthemes: separating responsibilities as a clinician from those of an RA; critically reflecting on the shared responsibilities of principal investigators and RAs; and identifying the role of the Research Ethics Committee). Although RAs possess a variety of moral competencies and have an important role in protecting research participants in vulnerable circumstances, that role is largely unrecognized.

Challenges to Studying Illicit Drug Users

PURPOSE

Throughout the world, illicit drug use continues to pose a significant risk to public health. The opioid crisis in North America, the diversion of the prescription drug tramadol throughout Africa, and the increasing supply of methamphetamines in East and South Asia all contribute to increasing risks to individual and societal health. Furthermore, the violation of human rights in efforts to enforce prohibitionist values poses significant threats to many individuals worldwide. With these evolving situations, it is imperative that researchers direct their attention to the various populations of illicit drug users. However, the inclusion of illicit drug users, often considered a vulnerable population, as participants in research studies presents several increased risks that must be addressed in study protocols. Researchers are required to provide "additional safeguards" to all study protocols involving illicit drug users, but there is often substantial variability and inconsistency in how these safeguards are applied. Additional safeguards can be timely, costly, and unduly burdensome for researchers, ethical review boards, and research participants.

APPROACH

Through synthesis of the current literature, this article addresses the barriers to studying illicit drug users and the methods researchers can utilize to minimize risk. A case study is provided to illustrate the high level of scrutiny of study protocols involving the participation of illicit drug users and the effect of such scrutiny on recruitment of participants. The article concludes with a discussion of the effects of the current political climate on the recruitment of illicit drug users in research.

CONCLUSIONS

Individuals who participate in criminal or illegal behaviors such as illicit drug use, prostitution, illegal entry into a country, and human trafficking are susceptible to multiple physical, mental, and social health risks, as well as criminal prosecution. The importance of research on the health of marginalized populations cannot be overstated. This work must continue, and at the same time, we must continue to protect these individuals to the best of our ability through diligent attention to sound research methods.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

The use of illicit drugs continues to pose a substantial threat to global health. Individuals who use illicit drugs are susceptible to multiple physical, mental, and social health risks, as well as criminal prosecution. It is imperative that researchers study these vulnerable populations in order to develop interventions to minimize individual and societal harm. There are several barriers to the study of illicit drug users that must be addressed through rigorous methodology and the addition of safeguards.

Research on women with substance use disorders: Reviewing progress and developing a research and implementation roadmap

BACKGROUND

Research on women with substance use disorders has expanded, yet knowledge and implementation gaps remain.

METHODS

Drawing from topics discussed at the 2017 meeting of InWomen's in Montreal, Canada, this article reviews key progress in research on substance use among women, adolescents, and families to delineate priorities for the next generation of research.

RESULTS

The field has seen significant accomplishments in multiple domains, including the management of pregnant women with substance use and comorbid psychiatric disorders, caring for neonates in opioid withdrawal, greater inclusion of and treatment options for LGBTQ + communities, gendered instrumentation, and gender-focused HIV interventions for adolescent girls and women. Women who use alcohol and other drugs often experience other comorbid medical conditions (chronic Hepatitis C and HIV), contextual confounders (intimate partner violence exposure, homelessness, trauma), and social expectations (e.g., as caretakers) that must be addressed as part of integrated care to effectively treat women's substance use issues. Although significant advances have been made in the field to date, gender-based issues for women remain a neglected area in much of substance abuse research. Few dedicated and gender-focused funding opportunities exist and research has been siloed, limiting the potential for collaborations or interdisciplinary cross-talk.

CONCLUSION

Given renewed attention to substance use in the context of the burgeoning opioid epidemic and shifts in global politics that affect women's substance use, the field requires a strategic rethink to invigorate a pipeline of future research and researchers.

"Money Helps": People who inject drugs and their perceptions of financial compensation and its ethical implications

This study documents how people who inject drugs (PWID) in rural Puerto Rico perceive payments for participating in HIV epidemiological studies. In-depth interviews were conducted among a subset (n = 40) of active PWID older than 18 years of age who had been previously enrolled in a much larger study (N = 360). Findings suggest that financial compensation was the main motivation for initially enrolling in the parent study. Then, as trust in the researchers developed, participants came to perceive compensation as part of a reciprocal exchange in which they assisted researchers by providing a trustful account of their experiences and researchers reciprocated with financial support.

The Gender of the War on Drugs

In this review, I explore some of the lines of inquiry that have emerged in anthropology and closely related disciplines around the theme of drugs and gender. The critical research on drugs over the past few decades has tended to focus on how prohibition policies are racialized, which has been important for revealing the injustice and racism found in drug policies and in commonsense notions about drugs and drug use. Drawing from intersectional theorists who have long argued that racial categories are never experienced or imposed as singular identities separate from gender, language, class, and sexuality, I argue in this article that the literature on gender and drugs has struggled with two main interrelated problems: determining ( a) how to understand gender and race together and ( b) how to theorize gender in relation to power when these two factors are often conflated with each other in both popular discourse and theoretical dispositions about the war on drugs.

Personal Control Over Decisions to Participate in Research by Persons With Histories of Both Substance Use Disorders and Criminal Justice Supervision

Individuals must feel free to exert personal control over decisions regarding research participation. We present an examination of participants' perceived personal control over, as well as reported pressures and threats from others, influencing their decision to join a study assessing the effectiveness of extended-release naltrexone in preventing opioid dependence relapse. Most participants endorsed a strong sense of control over the decision; few reported pressures or threats. Although few in number, participants' brief narrative descriptions of the pressures and threats are illuminating and provide context for their perceptions of personal control. Based on this work, we propose a useful set of tools to help ascertain participants' sense of personal control in joining research.

Our Life Depends on This Drug: Competence, Inequity, and Voluntary Consent in Clinical Trials on Supervised Injectable Opioid Assisted Treatment

Supervised injectable opioid assisted treament (siOAT) prescribes injectable opioids to individuals for whom other forms of addiction treatment have been ineffective. In this article, we examine arguments that opioid-dependent people should be assumed incompetent to voluntarily consent to clinical research on siOAT unless proven otherwise. We agree that concerns about competence and voluntary consent deserve careful attention in this context. But we oppose framing the issue solely as a matter of the competence of opioid-dependent people and emphasize that it should be considered in the context of inequities in access to siOAT as a medical treatment. Consequently, we suggest that bioethics literature on nonexploitation, which focuses on clinical research in low-income countries, is helpful due to locating ethical issues within systemic social conditions. Finally, we consider the implications of our argument for the ethics of clinical research on siOAT.

Qualitative Research Methods to Advance Research on Health Inequities Among Previously Incarcerated Women Living With HIV in Alabama

Justice-involved HIV-positive women have poor health outcomes that constitute health inequities. Researchers have yet to embrace the range of qualitative methods to elucidate how psychosocial histories are connected to pathways of vulnerability to HIV and incarceration for this key population. We used life course narratives and intersubjectivity-predicated on interview dialogue-to investigate how familial and social settings established their social patterning of HIV, incarceration risk, and poor health. Working with two Alabama community-based organizations, we recruited and interviewed 24 HIV-positive cisgender women with cyclical incarceration. We analyzed the data by charting women's life histories and conducting iterative content analyses. Participants described chaotic home environments, marked by exposure to trauma in childhood. The majority experienced repeated sexual and physical abuse that went undiagnosed and untreated until adulthood. Adolescence and young adulthood were characterized by onset of substance use, violent intimate partnerships, and subsequent behavioral and mental health problems. In adulthood, risk behaviors persisted for decades and women lacked mental health treatment and social support. Life course narratives and intersubjectivity contributed to knowledge by affording agency to marginalized participants to reflect on and narrate their life stories; instilling needed trust for researchers to investigate the complex risk pathways and psychosocial histories with this population; illuminating the nature, timing, sequence, and frequency of events underlying women's vulnerability and exposure to HIV and incarceration; and clarifying that early shaping events in childhood are connected to later risk environments and behaviors in adolescence and adulthood, suggesting the need for earlier interventions than are typically proposed.

Recognizing Risk and Vulnerability in Research Ethics: Imagining the "What Ifs?"

Research ethics committees (RECs) may misunderstand the vulnerability of participants, given their distance from the field. What RECs identify as the vulnerabilities that were not adequately recognized in protocols and how they attempt to protect the perceived vulnerability of participants and mitigate risks were examined using the response letters sent to researchers by three university-based RECs. Using a critical qualitative method informed by feminist ethics, we identified an overarching theme of recognizing and responding to cascading vulnerabilities and four subthemes: identifying vulnerable groups, recognizing potentially risky research, imagining the "what ifs," and mitigating perceived risks. An ethics approach that is up-close, as opposed to distant, is needed to foster closer relationships among participants, researchers, and RECs and to understand participant vulnerability and strength better.

"We're giving you something so we get something in return": Perspectives on research participation and compensation among people living with HIV who use drugs

BACKGROUND

Compensation for participating in research has been a fundamental element of the research apparatus despite concerns about its impact on incentivising participation. Researchers and research ethics boards acknowledge that compensation may prompt structurally vulnerable populations, such as people who use drugs (PWUD), to engage in research primarily out of financial need. Thus, institutional restrictions around compensation have been implemented. This study explores the ethical implications of compensation practices aimed at 'protecting' structurally vulnerable people living with HIV (PLHIV) who use drugs within the context of individuals' lived realities.

METHODS

We draw on five focus groups conducted in 2011 with 25 PLHIV who use drugs and access a community-based HIV care facility in Vancouver, Canada. This analysis focused on participants' perceptions of research compensation, which became the central point of discussion in each group.

RESULTS

Participants viewed research as a transactional process through which they could challenge the underpinnings of bioethics and bargain for compensation. Research compensation was thus critical to attracting participants and positioned as a 'legitimate' form of income. Participants' medicalised identities, specifically living with HIV, were fundamental to justifying compensation. The type of compensation (e.g. gift card, cash) also significantly impacted whether participants were fully compensated and, at times, served to exacerbate their structural vulnerability.

CONCLUSION

Research compensation is critical in shaping structurally vulnerable populations' participation and experiences with research and can further marginalize individuals. Practices surrounding research compensation, particularly for drug-using and HIV-positive populations, need to be evaluated to ensure participants are equitably compensated for the expertise they provide.

Stakeholders' Views on Barriers to Research on Controversial Controlled Substances

Many diseases and disease symptoms still lack effective treatment. At the same time, certain controversial Schedule I drugs, such as heroin and cannabis, have been reputed to have considerable therapeutic potential for addressing significant medical problems. Yet, there is a paucity of U.S. clinical studies on the therapeutic uses of controlled drugs. For example, people living with HIV/AIDS experience a variety of disease- and medication-related symptoms. Their chronic pain is intense, frequent, and difficult to treat. Nevertheless, clinical trials of compassionate management for their chronic symptoms, which should be a research priority, are stymied. We employed qualitative methods to develop an understanding of the barriers to research on potential therapeutic uses of Schedule I drugs so that they might be addressed. We elicited the perspectives of key stakeholder groups that would be involved in such studies: people living with HIV/AIDS, clinicians, and members of institutional review boards. As we identified obstacles to research, we found that all of the stakeholder groups arrived at the same conclusion, that clinical research on the therapeutic potential of these drugs is ethically required.

An Ethical Exploration of Barriers to Research on Controlled Drugs

We examine the ethical, social, and regulatory barriers that may hinder research on therapeutic potential of certain controversial controlled substances like marijuana, heroin, or ketamine. Hazards for individuals and society and potential adverse effects on communities may be good reasons for limiting access and justify careful monitoring of these substances. Overly strict regulations, fear of legal consequences, stigma associated with abuse and populations using illicit drugs, and lack of funding may, however, limit research on their considerable therapeutic potential. We review the surprisingly sparse literature and address the particular ethical concerns pertinent to research with illicit and addictive substances, such as undue inducement, informed consent, therapeutic misconception, and risk to participants, researchers, and institutions. We consider the perspectives of key research stakeholders and explore whether they may be infected with bias. We conclude by proposing an empirical research agenda to provide an evidentiary basis for ethical reasoning.

Ethical dilemmas in research in relation to ethical review: An empirical study

The aim of the present article is to contribute empirically derived knowledge about Swedish researchers’ experience of ethical problems, conflicts and dilemmas in their research practice in relation to the ethical vetting legislation and procedure. The study has been carried out using the critical incident technique, with researchers from various disciplines providing examples from their own research practice of problems relating to research ethics. The analysis of the researchers’ responses indicates three phenomena, partly in line with similar studies in other countries: (i) the law of ethical vetting puts limits on the relevant research ethical questions; (ii) it is not possible to anticipate all questions of research ethics; and (iii) there are consequences to the fact that the boards for ethical vetting ignore problems that fall outside the law.

Denial of prescription analgesia among people who inject drugs in a Canadian setting

INTRODUCTION AND AIMS

Despite the high prevalence of pain among people who inject drugs (PWIDs), clinicians may be reluctant to prescribe opioid-based analgesia to those with a history of drug use or addiction. We sought to examine the prevalence and correlates of PWIDs reporting being denied of prescription analgesia (PA). We also explored reported reasons for and actions taken after being denied PA.

DESIGN AND METHODS

Using data from two prospective cohort studies of PWIDs, multivariate logistic regression was used to identify the prevalence and correlates of reporting being denied PA. Descriptive statistics were used to characterise reasons for denials and subsequent actions.

RESULTS

Approximately two-thirds (66.5%) of our sample of 462 active PWIDs reported having ever been denied PA. We found that reporting being denied PA was significantly and positively associated with having ever been enrolled in methadone maintenance treatment (adjusted odds ratio 1.76, 95% confidence interval 1.11-2.80) and daily cocaine injection (adjusted odds ratio 2.38, 95% confidence interval 1.00-5.66). The most commonly reported reason for being denied PA was being accused of drug seeking (44.0%). Commonly reported actions taken after being denied PA included buying the requested medication off the street (40.1%) or obtaining heroin to treat pain (32.9%).

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS

These findings highlight the challenges of addressing perceived pain and the need for strategies to prevent high-risk methods of self-managing pain, such as obtaining diverted medications or illicit substances for pain. Such strategies may include integrated pain management guidelines within methadone maintenance treatment and other substance use treatment programs.

Using population screening for recruitment of young adults engaged in illicit drug use: methodological issues and sampling outcomes

Social stigma, legal sanctions and the associated lack of sampling frames create barriers to the probabilistic sampling of those engaged in a variety of behaviour, including illicit drug use. We used a novel sampling approach to recruit respondents into a longitudinal study examining amphetamine-type stimulant use. A young adult population was screened for lifetime drug use to create a sampling frame of amphetamine-type stimulant users and non-users. We posted 12,118 screening questionnaires to a random selection of young adults listed on the electoral roll for Brisbane and the Gold Coast, Australia (N=107,275). Using a small pre-paid incentive and intensive telephone and postal reminders we attained a screening response rate of 49.9%. Eligible amphetamine-type stimulant users (used ecstasy or methamphetamine⩾3 times in past 12 months) and non-users (never used ecstasy or methamphetamine) were identified by screening responses. About two-thirds of each selected group took part in the longitudinal study. Comparisons with large-scale population survey data suggest the sample was broadly representative of young adult amphetamine-type stimulant users in Australia.

Institutional ethical review and ethnographic research involving injection drug users: a case study

Ethnographic research among people who inject drugs (PWID) involves complex ethical issues. While ethical review frameworks have been critiqued by social scientists, there is a lack of social science research examining institutional ethical review processes, particularly in relation to ethnographic work. This case study describes the institutional ethical review of an ethnographic research project using observational fieldwork and in-depth interviews to examine injection drug use. The review process and the salient concerns of the review committee are recounted, and the investigators' responses to the committee's concerns and requests are described to illustrate how key issues were resolved. The review committee expressed concerns regarding researcher safety when conducting fieldwork, and the investigators were asked to liaise with the police regarding the proposed research. An ongoing dialogue with the institutional review committee regarding researcher safety and autonomy from police involvement, as well as formal consultation with a local drug user group and solicitation of opinions from external experts, helped to resolve these issues. This case study suggests that ethical review processes can be particularly challenging for ethnographic projects focused on illegal behaviours, and that while some challenges could be mediated by modifying existing ethical review procedures, there is a need for legislation that provides legal protection of research data and participant confidentiality.

Good intentions and dangerous assumptions: Research ethics committees and illicit drug use research

Illicit drug users are frequently identified as a ‘vulnerable population’ requiring ‘special protection’ and ‘additional safeguards’ in research. However, without specific guidance on how to enact these special protections and safeguards, research ethics committee (REC) members sometimes fall back on untested assumptions about the ethics of illicit drug use research. In light of growing calls for ‘evidence-based research ethics’, this commentary examines three common assumptions amongst REC members about what constitutes ethical research with drug users, and whether such assumptions are borne out by a growing body of empirical data. The assumptions that form the focus of this commentary are as follows: (i) drug users do not have the capacity to provide informed consent to research; (ii) it is ethically problematic to provide financial incentives to drug users to participate in research; and (iii) asking drug users about their experiences ‘re-traumatizes’ and ‘re-victimizes’ them.