Perceptions of members of ethics committees of medical institutions in India on controlled human infection studies (CHIS) following a sensitization workshop: a systematic survey.

IF 1.6 Q2 ETHICS
Monash Bioethics Review Pub Date : 2025-06-01 Epub Date: 2025-02-13 DOI:10.1007/s40592-025-00231-8
Subitha Lakshminarayanan, P Muthu Kumaran, Suganya Jayaram, Jayanthi Mathaiyan, Medha Rajappa
{"title":"Perceptions of members of ethics committees of medical institutions in India on controlled human infection studies (CHIS) following a sensitization workshop: a systematic survey.","authors":"Subitha Lakshminarayanan, P Muthu Kumaran, Suganya Jayaram, Jayanthi Mathaiyan, Medha Rajappa","doi":"10.1007/s40592-025-00231-8","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Controlled Human Infection Studies (CHIS) involving the deliberate exposure of healthy individuals to infectious agents, are emerging as a valuable tool for medical research. This systematic survey explores the perceptions of ethics committee members from various Indian medical research institutions after participating in a sensitization workshop on CHIS. This cross-sectional study was conducted on the workshop participants through an online survey. The workshop was held in a hybrid mode and around 60 participants from four tertiary care institutions and research institutes had participated. A structured questionnaire was used to assess their evolving perspectives, challenges, and recommendations related to CHIS and the effectiveness of the workshop. Both Likert scale and open-ended items were included in the survey. Responses are presented as percentage and views supported through the quotes from responses. Around 43 participants responded to the survey (72%). Participants acknowledged the potential benefits of CHIS but were concerned about the psychological harm and other risks. Challenges were identified in conducting and reviewing CHIS, including regulatory approvals, risk assessment, and robust informed consent. The need for development of regulatory guidelines, specialized training, risk mitigation strategies, community engagement, and compensation mechanisms were highlighted. The sensitization workshop was considered valuable in enhancing participants' understanding of CHIS, although participants expressed a need for continued training and experience to effectively review such studies. With the Indian Council of Medical Research (ICMR) releasing a policy statement on ethical conduct of CHIS in India, this study provides a foundation for future capacity-building initiatives among ethics committee members. The findings emphasize the significance of ongoing dialogue to standardize the ethical review process for CHIS, thus facilitating their acceptance and realization in India's medical research landscape.</p>","PeriodicalId":43628,"journal":{"name":"Monash Bioethics Review","volume":" ","pages":"190-203"},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Monash Bioethics Review","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s40592-025-00231-8","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/2/13 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ETHICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Controlled Human Infection Studies (CHIS) involving the deliberate exposure of healthy individuals to infectious agents, are emerging as a valuable tool for medical research. This systematic survey explores the perceptions of ethics committee members from various Indian medical research institutions after participating in a sensitization workshop on CHIS. This cross-sectional study was conducted on the workshop participants through an online survey. The workshop was held in a hybrid mode and around 60 participants from four tertiary care institutions and research institutes had participated. A structured questionnaire was used to assess their evolving perspectives, challenges, and recommendations related to CHIS and the effectiveness of the workshop. Both Likert scale and open-ended items were included in the survey. Responses are presented as percentage and views supported through the quotes from responses. Around 43 participants responded to the survey (72%). Participants acknowledged the potential benefits of CHIS but were concerned about the psychological harm and other risks. Challenges were identified in conducting and reviewing CHIS, including regulatory approvals, risk assessment, and robust informed consent. The need for development of regulatory guidelines, specialized training, risk mitigation strategies, community engagement, and compensation mechanisms were highlighted. The sensitization workshop was considered valuable in enhancing participants' understanding of CHIS, although participants expressed a need for continued training and experience to effectively review such studies. With the Indian Council of Medical Research (ICMR) releasing a policy statement on ethical conduct of CHIS in India, this study provides a foundation for future capacity-building initiatives among ethics committee members. The findings emphasize the significance of ongoing dialogue to standardize the ethical review process for CHIS, thus facilitating their acceptance and realization in India's medical research landscape.

敏化讲习班后印度医疗机构伦理委员会成员对受控人类感染研究(CHIS)的看法:系统调查。
控制人类感染研究(CHIS)涉及健康个体故意暴露于传染原,正在成为医学研究的宝贵工具。这项系统的调查探讨了印度各医学研究机构的伦理委员会成员在参加关于CHIS的敏感化讲习班后的看法。这项横断面研究是通过在线调查对研讨会参与者进行的。工作坊以混合模式举办,约有60名来自四间三级医疗机构及研究机构的人士参加。我们使用了一份结构化的问卷来评估他们对CHIS的看法、挑战和建议以及研讨会的有效性。调查包括李克特量表和开放式项目。回复以百分比的形式呈现,并通过回复中的引用来支持观点。约有43名参与者回应了调查(72%)。参与者承认CHIS的潜在益处,但担心心理伤害和其他风险。在实施和审查CHIS方面存在挑战,包括监管批准、风险评估和强有力的知情同意。与会者强调,有必要制定监管准则、专门培训、减轻风险战略、社区参与和补偿机制。虽然与会者表示需要持续的培训和经验,以有效地审查这类研究,但敏化讲习班被认为对增进与会者对CHIS的了解很有价值。随着印度医学研究委员会(ICMR)发布关于印度CHIS伦理行为的政策声明,这项研究为伦理委员会成员今后的能力建设倡议提供了基础。研究结果强调了正在进行的对话的重要性,以使CHIS的伦理审查过程标准化,从而促进其在印度医学研究领域的接受和实现。
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
CiteScore
2.70
自引率
6.20%
发文量
16
期刊介绍: Monash Bioethics Review provides comprehensive coverage of traditional topics and emerging issues in bioethics. The Journal is especially concerned with empirically-informed philosophical bioethical analysis with policy relevance. Monash Bioethics Review also regularly publishes empirical studies providing explicit ethical analysis and/or with significant ethical or policy implications. Produced by the Monash University Centre for Human Bioethics since 1981 (originally as Bioethics News), Monash Bioethics Review is the oldest peer reviewed bioethics journal based in Australia–and one of the oldest bioethics journals in the world. An international forum for empirically-informed philosophical bioethical analysis with policy relevance. Includes empirical studies providing explicit ethical analysis and/or with significant ethical or policy implications. One of the oldest bioethics journals, produced by a world-leading bioethics centre. Publishes papers up to 13,000 words in length. Unique New Feature: All Articles Open for Commentary
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信