This Article Full Text (PDF) References Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via Web of Science (1) Citing Articles via Google Scholar Citing Articles via Scopus Google Scholar Articles by Taylor, H. A Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Taylor, H. A Social Bookmarking                         What's this?

Implementation of NIH inclusion guidelines: survey of NIH study section members

Department of Health Policy and Management, Bloomberg School of Public Health, Berman Institute of Bioethics, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD, USA, htaylor{at}jhsph.edu

Background Current National Institutes of Health (NIH) policy mandates the inclusion of women, minorities and children in clinical research. Institutional Review Boards (IRB), NIH Scientific Review Groups (SRG) and NIH program staff all have responsibility for the evaluation of Principal Investigator (PI) adherence to the inclusion guidelines.

Purpose The purpose of this survey was to describe the experience with and attitudes of SRG members toward the inclusion guidelines and to identify characteristics of respondents that predict their attitudes towards the policy. Methods A survey was sent to 746 SRG members. 425 SRG members responded and univariate and bivariate statistical analysis conducted.

Results The results of the survey identify one clear measure of success regarding the implementation of the NIH guidelines; SRG members indicate the guidelines are in part responsible for their attention to the inclusion of women, minorities and children in clinical research. In addition, SRG members believe that gender and race are important factors when assessing the diversity of study samples and that the current NIH guidelines are adequate for encouraging their inclusion. As a proxy measure of success, SRG members believe that PIs responsible for protocols reviewed by their study group are generally compliant with the inclusion guidelines. Limitation At least one potential limitation of this study is that while an effort was made to assure confidentiality, because the project was funded by the NIH, respondents may have been less critical of the guidelines than they would have been if the study was funded by non-NIH funds.

Conclusion Future research ought to explore whether IRB members and NIH program officers find PIs to be compliant as their projects get underway. In addition, more research ought to be conducted to assess the downstream effects of this important social policy. Clinical Trials 2008; 5: 140—146. http://ctj.sagepub.com

Clinical Trials, Vol. 5, No. 2, 140-146 (2008)
DOI: 10.1177/1740774508089457


CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter    What's this?