Ethical Considerations for Conducting Community-Engaged Research with Women Experiencing Homelessness and Incarcerated Women

Q2 Social Sciences
Kirsten Dickins
{"title":"Ethical Considerations for Conducting Community-Engaged Research with Women Experiencing Homelessness and Incarcerated Women","authors":"Kirsten Dickins","doi":"10.1002/eahr.60005","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n <p>Since 1979, <i>The Belmont Report</i> has served as a guidebook for ensuring that basic standards for ethical research are upheld. <i>The Belmont Report</i> calls for special protections of vulnerable research participants, such as people who are incarcerated and economically and educationally disadvantaged individuals who are deemed susceptible to exploitation. With a growing focus on health equity and community-engaged approaches in health equity research, efforts to involve vulnerable participants are increasing. Yet there is little understanding of what matters most to vulnerable populations. This study sought to understand, from participant perspectives, ethical considerations when conducting research with two vulnerable populations: women experiencing homelessness and women who are incarcerated. Health care professionals and staff that work closely with homeless and incarcerated populations were also interviewed. The findings from semistructured interviews with these populations underscore the sustained importance of respect for persons, beneficence, and justice, and further highlight the need for self-determination; privacy/confidentiality; continuous consent; fair treatment; benefit-burden balance; nonauthoritarian relationships; and fair access to research participation. Although <i>The Belmont Report</i> durably serves to ethically guide standard conventional research, the <i>Report</i>'s original concepts should be extended to include specific considerations when vulnerable populations are involved in community-engaged research.</p>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":36829,"journal":{"name":"Ethics & human research","volume":"47 1","pages":"20-33"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Ethics & human research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/eahr.60005","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Since 1979, The Belmont Report has served as a guidebook for ensuring that basic standards for ethical research are upheld. The Belmont Report calls for special protections of vulnerable research participants, such as people who are incarcerated and economically and educationally disadvantaged individuals who are deemed susceptible to exploitation. With a growing focus on health equity and community-engaged approaches in health equity research, efforts to involve vulnerable participants are increasing. Yet there is little understanding of what matters most to vulnerable populations. This study sought to understand, from participant perspectives, ethical considerations when conducting research with two vulnerable populations: women experiencing homelessness and women who are incarcerated. Health care professionals and staff that work closely with homeless and incarcerated populations were also interviewed. The findings from semistructured interviews with these populations underscore the sustained importance of respect for persons, beneficence, and justice, and further highlight the need for self-determination; privacy/confidentiality; continuous consent; fair treatment; benefit-burden balance; nonauthoritarian relationships; and fair access to research participation. Although The Belmont Report durably serves to ethically guide standard conventional research, the Report's original concepts should be extended to include specific considerations when vulnerable populations are involved in community-engaged research.

对无家可归妇女和被监禁妇女进行社区参与研究的伦理考虑。
自1979年以来,贝尔蒙特报告一直是确保伦理研究基本标准得到维护的指南。贝尔蒙特报告呼吁对弱势研究参与者进行特别保护,比如被监禁的人,以及经济和教育上处于不利地位的人,他们被认为容易受到剥削。随着对卫生公平和社区参与卫生公平研究方法的日益重视,使弱势参与者参与的努力正在增加。然而,对于什么对弱势群体最重要,人们却知之甚少。这项研究试图从参与者的角度来理解对两个弱势群体进行研究时的伦理考虑:无家可归的妇女和被监禁的妇女。还采访了与无家可归者和被监禁人口密切合作的保健专业人员和工作人员。对这些人群进行的半结构化访谈的结果强调了尊重个人、慈善和正义的持续重要性,并进一步强调了自决的必要性;隐私和保密;连续的同意;公平对待;benefit-burden平衡;nonauthoritarian关系;以及公平参与研究的机会。尽管《贝尔蒙特报告》一直在伦理上指导标准的传统研究,但报告的原始概念应该扩展,以包括弱势群体参与社区参与研究时的具体考虑。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Ethics & human research
Ethics & human research Social Sciences-Health (social science)
CiteScore
2.90
自引率
0.00%
发文量
35
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信