Implications of the Revised Common Rule for Qualitative Health Research
Opportunities, Concerns, and Recommendations
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 4706293 |
|---|---|
| Authors | J Owczarzak (0000-0003-2380-5533, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, MD, USA), Karen C Smith (0000-0003-2140-1690, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, MD, USA, corresponding author) |
| Year | 2022 |
| Volume | 32 |
| Issue | 2 |
| Pages | 385-393 |
| Publication date | 2022-01-01 |
| Peer Reviewed | Yes |
| Open Access | Yes |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | Qualitative Health Research (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 1049-7323 • E-ISSN: 1552-7557 |
| Publisher | SAGE Publications Inc (PUBLISHER) |
| DOI | 10.1177/10497323211061101 |
| PMID | 34874221 |
| OpenAlex | W4200193619 |
| Language | EN |
| References cited | 34 |
In January 2019, revisions to federal regulations that outline requirements for ethical oversight of human subjects research (The Revised Common Rule) went into effect. These revisions reflect major changes in thinking about risk and protection of research subjects. The Revised Common Rule (RCR) considerably curtails federal oversight of social and behavioral science, with most non-interventional research and "benign" behavioral interventions becoming exempt from mandated Institutional Review Board (IRB) approval, although determination of exemption remains with IRBs. As two qualitative health researchers serving on IRBs, we consider how this contraction of federal oversight dovetails with longstanding criticisms of IRB oversight of qualitative research. We explore the passage of the RCR as a point of potentially important change in procedure and principle in relation to ethical oversight of qualitative health research. We identify challenges and opportunities with these changes at the institutional, professional, and individual levels for ethical and impactful qualitative research
Alternative medicine · Common Rule · Engineering ethics · Informed consent · Institutional review board · Medical education · Pathology · Political science · Psychiatry · Psychological intervention · Public relations · Qualitative research · Research ethics · Social science · Sociology · Ethics in Clinical Research · Healthcare cost, quality, practices · Medicine · Nursing · Psychology · Qualitative Research Methods and Ethics
The ethical case against ethical regulation in humanities and social science research
Disclosure of non-recent (historic) childhood sexual abuse
“There Are No Known Benefits . . .”
Ethics in Qualitative Research
The Problem with Ethics
Ethics Review Boards for Research With Human Participants
Teaching research ethics as active learning
Qualitative Research and Institutional Review Boards
Anthropology and IRBs
The Fetishes of Consent
What’s the Harm? The Coverage of Ethics and Harm Avoidance in Research Methods Textbooks
Ethical Oversight of Public Health Research
When 'Do No Harm' Is Not Enough
Turn off the oxygen
Ethics in Action
Protecting Respondent Confidentiality in Qualitative Research
Ethical Components of Researcher-Researched Relationships in Qualitative Interviewing
Quality of qualitative research in the health sciences
Ethics Beyond the IRB
The New Bureaucracies of Virtue or When Form Fails to Follow Function
IRBs are the tip of the iceberg
Protecting human subjects and preserving academic freedom
Ethical escape routes for underground ethnographers
The perils of working at home
Upholding "Colonial Unknowing" Through the IRB
Ethics, Reflexivity, and "Ethically Important Moments" in Research
Ethical Gifts
From the Form to the Face to Face
| Citation velocity | historical |
|---|---|
| Highly cited | No |