Co-production and Managing Uncertainty in Health Research Regulation: A Delphi Study

被引:0
作者
Isabel Fletcher
Stanislav Birko
Edward S. Dove
Graeme T. Laurie
Catriona McMillan
Emily Postan
Nayha Sethi
Annie Sorbie
机构
[1] University of Edinburgh,J. Kenyon Mason Institute for Medicine, Life Sciences and the Law, School of Law
[2] University of Montreal,School of Public Health
[3] University of Edinburgh,J. Kenyon Mason Institute for Medicine, Life Sciences and the Law, Usher Institute
来源
Health Care Analysis | 2020年 / 28卷
关键词
Collaboration; Co-production; Health research regulation; Proportionality; Public interest; Regulatory stewardship; Stakeholders;
D O I
暂无
中图分类号
学科分类号
摘要
European and international regulation of human health research is typified by a morass of interconnecting laws, diverse and divergent ethical frameworks, and national and transnational standards. There is also a tendency for legislators to regulate in silos—that is, in discrete fields of scientific activity without due regard to the need to make new knowledge as generalisable as possible. There are myriad challenges for the stakeholders—researchers and regulators alike—who attempt to navigate these landscapes. This Delphi study was undertaken in order to provide the first interdisciplinary and crosscutting analysis of health research regulation, as it is experienced by such stakeholders in the UK context. As well as reinforcing existing understandings of the regulatory environment, Delphi participants called for greater collaboration, and even co-production, of processes involved in health research regulation. On the basis of this research, we offer insights about how health research regulation can become a matter with which a wider range of stakeholders—including researchers, regulators, publics and research sponsors—can engage. The evidence supports the normative claim that health research regulation should continue to move away from strict, prescriptive rules-based approaches, and towards flexible principle-based regimes that allow researchers, regulators and publics to co-produce regulatory systems serving core principles. By unpacking thorny concepts and practices at the heart of health research regulation—including the public interest and public engagement—our results have the potential to situate and breathe life into them. The results also demonstrate that while proportionality is well-recognised as a crucial element of flexible regulatory systems, more must be done to operationalise this as an ethical assessment of the values and risks at stake at multiple junctures in the research trajectory. This is required if we are to move beyond proportionality as a mere risk-management tool. Compliance culture no longer accurately reflects the needs and expectations of researchers or regulators, nor does it necessarily produce the best research. Embracing uncertainty—both as a human practice and a regulatory objective—may represent the brighter future for health research.
引用
收藏
页码:99 / 120
页数:21
相关论文
共 52 条
[1]  
Beech B(1997)Studying the future: A Delphi survey of how multi-disciplinary clinical staff view the likely development of two community mental health centres over the course of the next two years Journal of Advanced Nursing 25 331-338
[2]  
Birko S(2015)A Delphi technology foresight study: Mapping social construction of scientific evidence on metagenomics tests for water safety PLoS ONE 10 e0129706-101
[3]  
Dove ES(2006)Using thematic analysis in psychology Qualitative Research in Psychology 3 77-650
[4]  
Özdemir V(2014)Mapping the impact of patient and public involvement on health and social care research: A systematic review Health Expectations 17 637-1030
[5]  
Braun V(2018)The EU general data protection regulation: Implications for international scientific research in the digital era Journal of Law, Medicine & Ethics 44 1013-96
[6]  
Clarke V(2017)Reconfiguring social value in health research through the lens of liminality Bioethics 31 87-72
[7]  
Brett J(2017)Liminality and the limits of law in health research regulation: What are we missing in the spaces in-between? Medical Law Review 25 47-134
[8]  
Staniszewska S(2018)How do we make sense of chaos? Navigating health research regulation through the liminality of the Brexit process Medical Law International 18 110-347
[9]  
Mockford C(2018)Charting regulatory stewardship in health research: Making the invisible visible Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics 27 333-1065
[10]  
Herron-Marx S(2011)Patients as team members: Opportunities, challenges and paradoxes of including patients in multi-professional healthcare teams Sociology of Health & Illness 33 1050-1250