National Academies Press: OpenBook
« Previous: Session 6: Purview and Roles of Institutional Review Boards
Suggested Citation:"Appendix A: Workshop Agenda." National Research Council. 2013. Proposed Revisions to the Common Rule: Perspectives of Social and Behavioral Scientists: Workshop Summary. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/18383.
×

Appendix A

Workshop Agenda

Board on Behavioral, Cognitive, and Sensory Sciences
Division of Behavioral and Social Sciences and Education

Workshop on Proposed Revisions to the Common Rule in
Relation to the Behavioral and Social Sciences

The National Academies Building
2101 Constitution Avenue, NW
First Floor Lecture Room and Overflow Room NAS 125
Washington, DC 20418

AGENDA

March 21–22, 2013

Overview:

The Department of Health and Human Services issued an advance notice of proposed rulemaking (ANPRM) on July 26, 2011, to solicit comments on how current regulations for protecting research participants under 45 CFR Parts 46 (“Common Rule”) could be modernized and revised to be more effective. The National Research Council (NRC) appointed a panel to address the proposed revisions to the Common Rule that have particular relevance to the behavioral and social sciences. The purpose of this two-day workshop is to explore the implications of the proposed revisions and of alternative approaches for protecting human participants while advancing the behavioral, social, and educational sciences. A workshop summary will be produced and the results of the workshop will provide input for a potential consensus study.

Objectives:

With regard to the following critical topics—types and levels of risks and harms, consent process and special populations, data use and sharing,

Suggested Citation:"Appendix A: Workshop Agenda." National Research Council. 2013. Proposed Revisions to the Common Rule: Perspectives of Social and Behavioral Scientists: Workshop Summary. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/18383.
×

multidisciplinary and multisite studies, and institutional review board (IRB) purview and roles—the objectives of the workshop are

  • to examine how the proposed revisions to the Common Rule might affect different types of research studies and methods in the behavioral, social, and educational sciences;
  • to identify strategies that may currently be used to protect participants and advance science, and suggest refinements or alternatives to the proposed rulemaking that will make them more workable for behavioral, social, and educational sciences as well as for bio-medical sciences; and
  • to identify topics for research emerging from the proposed rule-making that will assist in developing best practices for implementing the new human research protections and assessing the effectiveness of the rules and their implementation by IRBs and researchers.
  DAY 1: THURSDAY, MARCH 21, 2013
 
8:15 am Check in and Continental breakfast
 
8:45 Welcome and Introduction of Members of the Committee on Revisions to the Common Rule for the Protection of Human Subjects in Research in the Behavioral and Social Sciences
Robert M. Hauser, National Research Council, Executive Director, Division of Behavioral and Social Sciences and Education
 
9:00 Opening Remarks
Introduction: This session will briefly provide the context for the workshop by explaining why the focus is on social, behavioral, and educational sciences; how research methods overlap with those used in biomedical sciences, and an introduction to the six major topics that will be addressed in the workshop. Susan Fiske, Chair, Committee on Revisions to the Common Rule for the Protection of Human Subjects in Research in the
Behavioral and Social Sciences, Princeton University
Suggested Citation:"Appendix A: Workshop Agenda." National Research Council. 2013. Proposed Revisions to the Common Rule: Perspectives of Social and Behavioral Scientists: Workshop Summary. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/18383.
×
9:15 Session 1: Review of the Evidence
Introduction: This session will review what has been learned from previous NRC reports on the protection of human subjects and will review the empirical evidence on the functioning of the Common Rule and IRBs. Connie Citro, National Research Council (review of NRC reports)
Jeffery Rodamar, Department of Education (review of empirical evidence)
 
10:00 BREAK
 
10:10 Session 2: Risks and Harms
Introduction: This session will focus on the types of risks and harm encountered in social, behavioral, and educational sciences, such as psychological, physical, and information; the levels of risk and the difference between severity of harm and probability of harm; adverse events; and benefits. [The ANPRM asked for input on calibrating levels of IRB review to levels of risk.] Celia Fisher, Fordham University, Center for Ethics Education
 
10:20 Speaker 1: Richard T. Campbell, University of Illinois at Chicago, Institute for Health Research and Policy (Discussion of the issues in the context of research on aging, health, racial, ethnic, and socioeconomic disparities; and suggestions for calibrating levels of review to levels of risk.)
 
10:40 Speaker 2: Brian Mustanski, Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine (Discussion of issues in the context of sexuality and health research with LGBT youth; participants’ appraisals of risk and benefits in behavioral and social science research.)
 
11:00 Speaker 3: Steven Breckler, American Psychological Association (Discussion of the issues in the context of the broader perspective of the behavioral and psychological sciences, providing a framework for assessing risk of harm, and critiquing the ANPRM proposals for calibrating level of review to the level of risk.)
Suggested Citation:"Appendix A: Workshop Agenda." National Research Council. 2013. Proposed Revisions to the Common Rule: Perspectives of Social and Behavioral Scientists: Workshop Summary. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/18383.
×
11:20 Speaker 4: Charles Plott, California Institute of Technology (Discussion of the nature of risks in relation to economic, decision, and political sciences.)
 
11:40 Moderated Q&A and Discussion
Celia Fisher
 
12:00 pm LUNCH
 
1:00 Session 3: Special Populations and Consent Processes
Introduction: This session will focus on the consent process in general and on research involving special populations, such as children, prisoners, persons with mental illness or other disabilities, persons with different languages, and research that involves complex consents such as family members and caregivers. [The ANPRM asked for input on proposed revisions to the Common Rule that would require the use of a standardized consent form and for a new rule that would require consent to be obtained for all future uses of biospecimens, whether identifiable or not, and for re-consenting people for further use of existing research data.] Margaret Foster Riley, University of Virginia
 
1:10 Speaker 1: Sally Powers, University of Massachusetts, Amherst (Discussion of the issues in the context of research on biopsychosocial factors hypothesized to contribute to depression in family systems, particular focus on “complex consents.”)
 
1:40 Speaker 2: Roxane Cohen Silver, University of California, Irvine (Discussion of the issues in the context of research on factors, effects, beliefs, and predictors of disaster and trauma; with particular focus on the process of consent, versus the form, to protect participants and advance research that can take place during or immediately after traumatic events.)
Suggested Citation:"Appendix A: Workshop Agenda." National Research Council. 2013. Proposed Revisions to the Common Rule: Perspectives of Social and Behavioral Scientists: Workshop Summary. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/18383.
×
2:10 Speaker 3: Celia Fisher, Fordham University, Center for Ethics Education (Discussion of the issues in the context of research with biospecimens and addressing issues related to the various forms of consent for different types of research.)
 
2:40 Moderated Q&A and Discussion
Margaret Foster Riley
 
3:00 BREAK
 
3:20 Session 4: Data Use and Sharing and Technological Advancements
Introduction: This session will examine issues related to the protection of research participants in studies that involve data use and sharing and which take advantage of technological advancements. Issues relate to privacy and data security, third parties, future use, analysis, de-identification, re-consent, breaches through computer losses or accidents. [The ANPRM asked for input on proposed revisions to the Common Rule that would require adopting HIPAA standards for the protection of privacy and data security and also for a new rule that would require consent to be obtained for all future uses of biospecimens, whether identifiable or not, and for re-consenting people for further use of existing research data.]
David Weir, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Survey Research Center
 
3:30 Speaker 1: George Alter, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, ICPSR (Discussion of the issues from the perspective of data archives and technological advancements in data collection and sharing.)
 
4:00 Speaker 2: Taylor Martin, University of Utah (Discussion of the issues in the context of educational research,learning analytics, and use of varied technologies.)
 
4:30 Speaker 3: Susan Bouregy, Yale University Human Research Protection Program (Discussion of the issues with a special focus on HIPAA and information risk; particular focus on implications of new HIPAA regulations.)
Suggested Citation:"Appendix A: Workshop Agenda." National Research Council. 2013. Proposed Revisions to the Common Rule: Perspectives of Social and Behavioral Scientists: Workshop Summary. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/18383.
×
5:00 Moderated Q&A and Discussion
David Weir
 
5:20 Adjourn Day 1
 
      DAY 2: FRIDAY, MARCH 22, 2013
 
8:15 am Continental Breakfast
 
8:45 Welcome and Overview of Day 2
Susan Fiske, Princeton University
 
9:00 Session 5: Multidisciplinary and Multisite Studies Introduction: This session will examine issues related to the protection of research participants in studies that are multidisciplinary (SBE; biomedical/genomics), multisite, cross-universities, cross-national, or international. [The ANPRM asked for input on proposed revisions to the Common Rule that would allow for a single IRB for multisite studies.]
Robert Levine, Yale University, Interdisciplinary Center for Bioethics
 
9:10 Speaker 1: Pearl O’Rourke, Human Research Affairs, Partners Health Care System, Inc. (Discussion of the issues from the perspective of an IRB overseeing a large multisite NINDS study and the challenges involved.)
 
9:40 Speaker 2: Laura Stark, Vanderbilt University, Center for Medicine, Health, and Society (Discussion of issues from the perspective of anthropological research with a focus on local precedents and innovative methods for protecting participants and advancing research.)
 
10:10 Speaker 3: Thomas Coates, University of California, Los Angeles, Program in Global Health (Discussion of the issues in the context of international research on prevention of chronic and infectious diseases.)
 
10:40 BREAK
 
10:50 Moderated Q&A and Discussion
Robert Levine
Suggested Citation:"Appendix A: Workshop Agenda." National Research Council. 2013. Proposed Revisions to the Common Rule: Perspectives of Social and Behavioral Scientists: Workshop Summary. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/18383.
×
11:10 Session 6: Purview and Roles of Institutional Review Boards
Introduction: This session will focus on the critical role of IRBs in the context of the proposed revisions to the Common Rule. Will they help improve IRB functioning and effectiveness? [The ANPRM asked for input on a proposed revision to the Common Rule that would create a new category of “excused” research to replace the “exempt” category and possibly imposing additional regulation relating to data protection and consent on this new category.] Issues relate to IRB oversight of excused research, continuing review; plus issues such as education/guidance to IRBs, mission creep, appeals processes, asymmetrical incentives.
Yonette Thomas, Howard University, Office of the V.P. for Research and Compliance
 
11:20 Speaker 1: Lois Brako, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Regulatory and Compliance Oversight (Discussion of the issues from the perspective of an IRB that maximizes opportunities to be flexible and innovative.)
 
11:50 Speaker 2: Rena Lederman, Princeton University, Department of Anthropology (Discussion of IRB issues in the context of sociocultural anthropology and ethics.)
 
12:20 pm SHORT LUNCH BREAK
 
12:50 Speaker 3: Cheryl Crawford Watson, National Institute of Justice (Discussion of human subjects protection issues from the perspective of a research funder of projects that are under the purview of various IRBs and with particular focus on how regulations are applied.)
 
1:20 Moderated Q&A and Discussion
Yonette Thomas
Suggested Citation:"Appendix A: Workshop Agenda." National Research Council. 2013. Proposed Revisions to the Common Rule: Perspectives of Social and Behavioral Scientists: Workshop Summary. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/18383.
×
1:30 Common Themes Emerging from Workshop
Susan Fiske, Moderator
Melissa Abraham, Harvard Medical School and
Massachusetts General Hospital Felice Levine, American Educational Research Association Richard Nisbett, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor Charles Plott, California Institute of Technology
 
2:30 Adjourn

NOTE FOR PUBLIC MEETINGS: This meeting is being held to gather information to help the committee conduct its study. This committee will examine the information and material obtained during this, and other public meetings, in an effort to inform its work. Although opinions may be stated and lively discussion may ensue, no conclusions are being drawn at this time; no recommendations will be made. In fact, the committee will deliberate thoroughly before writing its draft report. Moreover, once the draft report is written, it must go through a rigorous review by experts who are anonymous to the committee, and the committee then must respond to this review with appropriate revisions that adequately satisfy the National Research Council’s Report Review Committee and the chair of the National Research Council before it is considered a National Research Council report. Therefore, observers who draw conclusions about the committee’s work based on today’s discussions will be doing so prematurely.

Furthermore, individual committee members often engage in discussion and questioning for the specific purpose of probing an issue and sharpening an argument. The comments of any given committee member may not necessarily reflect the position he or she may actually hold on the subject under discussion, to say nothing of that person’s future position as it may evolve in the course of the project. Any inferences about an individual’s position regarding findings or recommendations in the final report are therefore also premature.

Suggested Citation:"Appendix A: Workshop Agenda." National Research Council. 2013. Proposed Revisions to the Common Rule: Perspectives of Social and Behavioral Scientists: Workshop Summary. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/18383.
×
Page 83
Suggested Citation:"Appendix A: Workshop Agenda." National Research Council. 2013. Proposed Revisions to the Common Rule: Perspectives of Social and Behavioral Scientists: Workshop Summary. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/18383.
×
Page 84
Suggested Citation:"Appendix A: Workshop Agenda." National Research Council. 2013. Proposed Revisions to the Common Rule: Perspectives of Social and Behavioral Scientists: Workshop Summary. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/18383.
×
Page 85
Suggested Citation:"Appendix A: Workshop Agenda." National Research Council. 2013. Proposed Revisions to the Common Rule: Perspectives of Social and Behavioral Scientists: Workshop Summary. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/18383.
×
Page 86
Suggested Citation:"Appendix A: Workshop Agenda." National Research Council. 2013. Proposed Revisions to the Common Rule: Perspectives of Social and Behavioral Scientists: Workshop Summary. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/18383.
×
Page 87
Suggested Citation:"Appendix A: Workshop Agenda." National Research Council. 2013. Proposed Revisions to the Common Rule: Perspectives of Social and Behavioral Scientists: Workshop Summary. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/18383.
×
Page 88
Suggested Citation:"Appendix A: Workshop Agenda." National Research Council. 2013. Proposed Revisions to the Common Rule: Perspectives of Social and Behavioral Scientists: Workshop Summary. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/18383.
×
Page 89
Suggested Citation:"Appendix A: Workshop Agenda." National Research Council. 2013. Proposed Revisions to the Common Rule: Perspectives of Social and Behavioral Scientists: Workshop Summary. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/18383.
×
Page 90
Next: Appendix B: Biographical Sketches of Speakers »
Proposed Revisions to the Common Rule: Perspectives of Social and Behavioral Scientists: Workshop Summary Get This Book
×
Buy Paperback | $38.00 Buy Ebook | $30.99
MyNAP members save 10% online.
Login or Register to save!
Download Free PDF

On July 26, 2011, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services issued an advance notice of proposed rulemaking (ANPRM) with the purpose of soliciting comments on how current regulations for protecting research participants could be modernized and revised. The rationale for revising the regulations was as follows: this ANPRM seeks comment on how to better protect human subjects who are involved in research, while facilitating valuable research and reducing burden, delay, and ambiguity for investigators. The current regulations governing human subjects research were developed years ago when research was predominantly conducted at universities, colleges, and medical institutions, and each study generally took place at only a single site. Although the regulations have been amended over the years, they have not kept pace with the evolving human research enterprise, the proliferation of multisite clinical trials and observational studies, the expansion of health services research, research in the social and behavioral sciences, and research involving databases, the Internet, and biological specimen repositories, and the use of advanced technologies, such as genomics.

Proposed Revisions to the Common Rule: Perspectives of Social and Behavioral Scientists: Workshop Summary focuses on six broad topic areas:

1. Evidence on the functioning of the Common Rule and of institutional review boards (IRBs), to provide context for the proposed revisions.

2. The types and levels of risks and harms encountered in social and behavioral sciences, and issues related to the severity and probability of harm, because the ANPRM asks for input on calibration of levels of review to levels of risk.

3. The consent process and special populations, because new rules have been proposed to improve informed consent (e.g., standard consent form, consent for future uses of biospecimens, and re-consenting for further use of existing research data).

4. Issues related to the protection of research participants in studies that involve use of existing data and data sharing, because the ANPRM proposed applying standards for protecting the privacy of healthcare data to research data.

5. Multidisciplinary and multisite studies, because the ANPRM proposed a revision to the regulations that would allow multisite studies to be covered by a single IRB.

6. The purview and roles of IRBs, because the ANPRM included possible revisions to categories of research that could entail changes in IRB oversight.

  1. ×

    Welcome to OpenBook!

    You're looking at OpenBook, NAP.edu's online reading room since 1999. Based on feedback from you, our users, we've made some improvements that make it easier than ever to read thousands of publications on our website.

    Do you want to take a quick tour of the OpenBook's features?

    No Thanks Take a Tour »
  2. ×

    Show this book's table of contents, where you can jump to any chapter by name.

    « Back Next »
  3. ×

    ...or use these buttons to go back to the previous chapter or skip to the next one.

    « Back Next »
  4. ×

    Jump up to the previous page or down to the next one. Also, you can type in a page number and press Enter to go directly to that page in the book.

    « Back Next »
  5. ×

    Switch between the Original Pages, where you can read the report as it appeared in print, and Text Pages for the web version, where you can highlight and search the text.

    « Back Next »
  6. ×

    To search the entire text of this book, type in your search term here and press Enter.

    « Back Next »
  7. ×

    Share a link to this book page on your preferred social network or via email.

    « Back Next »
  8. ×

    View our suggested citation for this chapter.

    « Back Next »
  9. ×

    Ready to take your reading offline? Click here to buy this book in print or download it as a free PDF, if available.

    « Back Next »
Stay Connected!