Ethical challenges in conducting research in humanitarian crisis situations

Scoping review and thematic analysis of informed consent in humanitarian emergencies

BACKGROUND

To identify and to summarize challenges related to the informed consent process for research completed during humanitarian emergencies.

METHODS

Using relevant search terms, a search of 5 databases was completed, without language, date, or study type restriction. Studies were screened for inclusion, with eligible studies being those that were relevant to the informed consent process for research studies completed in humanitarian emergencies. A Grounded Theory Analysis was completed to identify themes and subthemes.

RESULTS

Review identified 30 relevant studies. We identified 11 challenges (lack of trust, therapeutic misconception, reduced capacity, security and privacy concerns, harmful research, power differential, literacy, language/local and cultural context, researcher burden and re-evaluation of ongoing trials) and 7 strategies (engage local research communities, use alternative to standard written consent process, modify traditional process of research ethics board review, dynamic consent, training of research staff, mandating transparency of commercial interests, and mandating reporting of informed consent process in all publications) to confront the challenges. These challenges and strategies were unique to the informed consent process in research conducted during humanitarian emergencies.

CONCLUSIONS

This scoping review identified an evidence-based guide for researchers and research ethics boards to perform ethical informed consent procedures in humanitarian emergencies.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

This trial was not registered as scoping reviews can not be registered as per updated PROSPERO guidelines.

Examining study participants' decision-making and ethics-related experiences in a dietary community randomized controlled trial in Malawi

BACKGROUND

The participant recruitment process is a key ethical pivot point when conducting robust research. There is a need to continuously review and improve recruitment processes in research trials and to build fair and effective partnerships between researchers and participants as an important core element in ensuring the ethical delivery of high-quality research. When participants make a fair, informed, and voluntary decision to enroll in a study, they agree to fulfill their roles. However, supporting study participants to fulfill study requirements is an important ethical obligation for researchers, yet evidenced as challenging to achieve. This paper reports on participants' motivations to volunteer and remain part of a dietary study conducted in Kasungu District, Malawi.

METHODS

We conducted twenty in-depth interviews (with chiefs, religious leaders, trial participants, and health surveillance assistants), five systematic ethnographic observations, and fourteen focus group discussions with trial participants and their partners. Interviews were audio-recorded and transcribed verbatim. We used a grounded theory methodology to analyse data that included coding, detailed memo writing, and data interpretation.

FINDINGS

The findings reveal that many participants had concerns during the trial. Thematically, experiences included anxieties, mistrust of researchers, rumours, fears of exploitation, and misconceptions. Anonymous concerns collected from the participants were reported to the trial team which enabled the researchers to appropriately support participants. Despite initial concerns, participants described being supported and expressed motivation to take up their role.

CONCLUSION

These findings highlight a diverse map of multiple notions of what is ethically relevant and what can impact participation and retention within a study. The study has revealed how embedding a responsive approach to address participants' concerns and ethical issues can support trust relationships. We argue for the need to employ embedded ethics strategies that enhance informed consent, focus on participants' needs and positive experiences, and support researchers to fulfill their roles. This work highlights the need for research ethics committees to focus on the risks of undue influence and prevent exploitation especially in settings with a high asymmetry in resources and power between researcher and participant groups.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

The Addressing Hidden Hunger with Agronomy (Malawi) trial was registered on 5th March 2019 (ISCRTN85899451).

Conceptualizing Ethical Issues of Humanitarian Work: Results From a Critical Literature Review

This article presents results of a critical review of the literature discussing the ethical issues arising in humanitarian work, following the method proposed by McCullough, Coverdale and Chervenak. Our aim was primarily to focus on how the ethical issues arising in humanitarian work are conceptualized within the literature we reviewed. We think that properly conceptualizing the ethical issues which humanitarian workers may face can provide avenues to better respond to them. We analysed 61 documents, as part of a literature review, which revealed that there truly is a need, amongst the authors and in humanitarian work, to discuss ethics. Indeed, even if only a small number of authors define explicitly the words they use to discuss ethics, the great quantity that we have uncovered in the documents seem to suggest vast and rich grounds upon which to address ethical issues. We believe it to be important that the ethical issues of humanitarian work are increasingly addressed in the literature and argue that it would be helpful for the vocabulary used by authors to be employed and developed even more rigorously, so that their discussions show more precision, coherence, relevance, exhaustiveness, and sufficiency. The review of the literature, as well as the resulting analysis in this article, is part of a broader project to suggest a way to conceptualize the ethical issues of humanitarian work based on the strengths and innovations of this and other studies.

Community engagement and building trust to resolve ethical challenges during humanitarian crises: experience from the CAGED study

Background

According to the Internal Displacement Monitoring Centre report on global human displacement, Ethiopia has the highest number of newly displaced people forced to flee their homes. Displaced people have arrived in other regions, sometimes leading to conflict. Several regions in Ethiopia experience on-going ethnic tensions and violence between tribes, which leaves smallholder farmers suspicious of any outside activities in their locale, assuming other ethnic groups may harm them. Changes in the central Ethiopian government have also led to suspicion of non-local agencies. The Campylobacter Genomics and Enteric Dysfunction (CAGED) research project's objective is to improve the incomes, livelihoods and nutrition of smallholder farmers and was conducted during this period of increasing violence. The project aims to assess the impact of reducing exposure to chicken excreta on young children's gut health and growth. This paper does not report empirical findings from CAGED, but is part of a series that aims to identify challenges in humanitarian research and reports on mitigation strategies during this research.

Discussion

This research is important to determine whether Campylobacter infection in chicken's contributes to illness and stunting in children. However, violence against other researchers in different parts of Ethiopia led to mistrust and lack of engagement by the community with the researchers. Some reactions were so hostile that the team was fearful about returning to some households. As a result, the team designed strategies to respond, including establishing two types of community advisory boards. One used pre-existing village elder structures and another was composed of village youth. Data collection team members received training in principles of ethics, consent, and crisis management, and were provided on-going support from local and international principal investigators and the study's ethics advisor.

Conclusion

The hostility and mistrust led to fear among the data collectors. These and the resulting strategies to address them resulted in delays for the research. However, the interventions taken resulted in successful completion of the field activities. Moreover, the lessons learned from this project are already being implemented with other projects being conducted in various parts of Ethiopia.

A systematic literature review of the ethics of conducting research in the humanitarian setting

Background

Research around humanitarian crises, aid delivery, and the impact of these crises on health and well-being has expanded dramatically. Ethical issues around these topics have recently received more attention. We conducted a systematic literature review to synthesize the lessons learned regarding the ethics of research in humanitarian crises.

Methods

We conducted a systematic review using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analysis (PRISMA) guidelines to identify articles regarding the ethics of research in humanitarian contexts between January 1, 1997 and September 1, 2019. We analyzed the articles to extract key themes and develop an agenda for future research.

Results

We identified 52 articles that matched our inclusion criteria. We categorized the article data into five categories of analysis: 32 were expert statements, 18 were case studies, 11 contained original research, eight were literature reviews and three were book chapters. All included articles were published in English. Using a step-wise qualitative analysis, we identified 10 major themes that encompassed these concepts and points. These major themes were: ethics review process (21 articles, [40.38%]); community engagement (15 articles [28.85%]); the dual imperative, or necessity that research be both academically sound and policy driven, clinical trials in the humanitarian setting (13 articles for each, [25.0%)]; informed consent (10 articles [19.23%]); cultural considerations (6 articles, [11.54%]); risks to researchers (5 articles, [9.62%]); child participation (4 articles [7.69%]); and finally mental health, and data ownership (2 articles for each [3.85%]).

Conclusions

Interest in the ethics of studying humanitarian crises has been dramatically increasing in recent years. While key concepts within all research settings such as beneficence, justice and respect for persons are crucially relevant, there are considerations unique to the humanitarian context. The particular vulnerabilities of conflict-affected populations, the contextual challenges of working in humanitarian settings, and the need for ensuring strong community engagement at all levels make this area of research particularly challenging. Humanitarian crises are prevalent throughout the globe, and studying them with the utmost ethical forethought is critical to maintaining sound research principles and ethical standards.

Use of verbal autopsy and social autopsy in humanitarian crises

INTRODUCTION

Two billion people live in countries affected by conflict, violence and fragility. These are exceptional situations in which mortality shifts dramatically and in which civil registration and vital statistics systems are often weakened or cease to function. Verbal autopsy and social autopsy (VA and SA) are methods used to assign causes of death and understand the contexts in which these occur, in settings where information is otherwise unavailable. This review sought to explore the use of VA and SA in humanitarian crises, with a focus on how these approaches are used to inform policy and programme responses.

METHODS

A rapid scoping review was conducted on the use of VA and SA in humanitarian crises in low and middle-income countries since 1991. Drawing on a maximum variation approach, two settings of application ('application contexts') were selected and investigated via nine semi-structured expert interviews.

RESULTS

VA can determine causes of death in crisis-affected populations where no other registration system is in place. Combined with SA and active community involvement, these methods can deliver a holistic view of obstacles to seeking and receiving essential healthcare, yielding context-specific information to inform appropriate responses. The contexts in which VA and SA are used require adaptations to standard tools, and new mobile developments in VA raise specific ethical considerations. Furthermore, collecting and sythesising data in a timely, continuous manner, and ensuring coordination and communication between agencies, is important to realise the potential of these approaches.

CONCLUSION

VA and SA are valuable research methods to foster evidence-informed responses for populations affected by humanitarian crises. When coordinated and communicated effectively, data generated through these methods can help to identify levels, causes and circumstances of deaths among vulnerable groups, and can enable planning and allocating resources effectively, potentially improving health system resilience to future crises.

Familiar ethical issues amplified: how members of research ethics committees describe ethical distinctions between disaster and non-disaster research

Background

The conduct of research in settings affected by disasters such as hurricanes, floods and earthquakes is challenging, particularly when infrastructures and resources were already limited pre-disaster. However, since post-disaster research is essential to the improvement of the humanitarian response, it is important that adequate research ethics oversight be available.

Methods

We aim to answer the following questions: 1) what do research ethics committee (REC) members who have reviewed research protocols to be conducted following disasters in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) perceive as the key ethical concerns associated with disaster research?, and 2) in what ways do REC members understand these concerns to be distinct from those arising in research conducted in non-crisis situations? This qualitative study was developed using interpretative description methodology; 15 interviews were conducted with REC members.

Results

Four key ethical issues were identified as presenting distinctive considerations for disaster research to be implemented in LMICs, and were described by participants as familiar research ethics issues that were amplified in these contexts. First, REC members viewed disaster research as having strong social value due to its potential for improving disaster response, but also as requiring a higher level of justification compared to other research settings. Second, they identified vulnerability as an overarching concern for disaster research ethics, and a feature that required careful and critical appraisal when assessing protocols. They noted that research participants’ vulnerabilities frequently change in the aftermath of a disaster and often in unpredictable ways. Third, they identified concerns related to promoting and maintaining safety, confidentiality and data security in insecure or austere environments. Lastly, though REC members endorsed the need and usefulness of community engagement, they noted that there are significant challenges in a disaster setting over and above those typically encountered in global health research to achieve meaningful community engagement.

Conclusion

Disaster research presents distinctive ethical considerations that require attention to ensure that participants are protected. As RECs review disaster research protocols, they should address these concerns and consider how justification, vulnerability, security and confidentially, and community engagement are shaped by the realities of conducting research in a disaster.

Research in disaster settings: a systematic qualitative review of ethical guidelines

BACKGROUND

Conducting research during or in the aftermath of disasters poses many specific practical and ethical challenges. This is particularly the case with research involving human subjects. The extraordinary circumstances of research conducted in disaster settings require appropriate regulations to ensure the protection of human participants. The goal of this study is to systematically and qualitatively review the existing ethical guidelines for disaster research by using the constant comparative method (CCM).

METHODS

We performed a systematic qualitative review of disaster research ethics guidelines to collect and compare existing regulations. Guidelines were identified by a three-tiered search strategy: 1) searching databases (PubMed and Google Scholar), 2) an Internet search (Google), and 3) a search of the references in the included documents from the first two searches. We used the constant comparative method (CCM) for analysis of included guidelines.

RESULTS

Fourteen full text guidelines were included for analysis. The included guidelines covered the period 2000-2014. Qualitative analysis of the included guidelines revealed two core themes: vulnerability and research ethics committee review. Within each of the two core themes, various categories and subcategories were identified.

CONCLUSIONS

Some concepts and terms identified in analyzed guidelines are used in an inconsistent manner and applied in different contexts. Conceptual clarity is needed in this area as well as empirical evidence to support the statements and requirements included in analyzed guidelines.

Ethical considerations: care of the critically ill and injured during pandemics and disasters: CHEST consensus statement

BACKGROUND

Mass critical care entails time-sensitive decisions and changes in the standard of care that it is possible to deliver. These circumstances increase provider uncertainty as well as patients' vulnerability and may, therefore, jeopardize disciplined, ethical decision-making. Planning for pandemics and disasters should incorporate ethics guidance to support providers who may otherwise make ad hoc patient care decisions that overstep ethical boundaries. This article provides consensus-developed suggestions about ethical challenges in caring for the critically ill or injured during pandemics or disasters. The suggestions in this article are important for all of those involved in any pandemic or disaster with multiple critically ill or injured patients, including front-line clinicians, hospital administrators, and public health or government officials.

METHODS

We adapted the American College of Chest Physicians (CHEST) Guidelines Oversight Committee's methodology to develop suggestions. Twenty-four key questions were developed, and literature searches were conducted to identify evidence for suggestions. The detailed literature reviews produced 144 articles. Based on their expertise within this domain, panel members also supplemented the literature search with governmental publications, interdisciplinary workgroup consensus documents, and other information not retrieved through PubMed. The literature in this field is not suitable to support evidence-based recommendations. Therefore, the panel developed expert opinion-based suggestions using a modified Delphi process.

RESULTS

We report the suggestions that focus on five essential domains: triage and allocation, ethical concerns of patients and families, ethical responsibilities to providers, conduct of research, and international concerns.

CONCLUSIONS

Ethics issues permeate virtually all aspects of pandemic and disaster response. We have addressed some of the most pressing issues, focusing on five essential domains: triage and allocation, ethical concerns of patients and families, ethical responsibilities to providers, conduct of research, and international concerns. Our suggestions reflect the consensus of the Task Force. We recognize, however, that some suggestions, including those related to end-of-life care, may be controversial. We highlight the need for additional research and dialogue in articulating values to guide health-care decisions during disasters.