Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39563405›Full record

ArticleImplementation science : IS2024

Ethical issues in implementation science: perspectives from a National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute workshop.

Neal W Dickert, Donna Spiegelman, Jennifer S Blumenthal-Barby, Garth Graham, Steven Joffe, Jeremy M Kahn, Nancy E Kass, Scott Y H Kim, Meeta P Kerlin, Aisha T Langford and 4 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Implementation science : IS, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

14 authors.

Neal W DickertDepartment of Medicine and Emory Health Services Research Center, Emory University School of Medicine, 1750 Haygood Drive #250-N, Atlanta, GA, USA. njr@emory.edu.ORCID 0000-0003-4415-3861
Donna SpiegelmanCenter for Methods On Implementation and Prevention Science, Department of Biostatistics, Yale School of Public Health, New Haven, CT, USA.
Jennifer S Blumenthal-BarbyBaylor College of Medicine, Center for Medical Ethics and Health Policy, Houston, TX, USA.
Garth GrahamHealthcare and Public Health at Google/YouTube, New Haven, CT, USA.
Steven JoffeDepartment of Medical Ethics and Health Policy, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA.
Jeremy M KahnDepartment of Critical Care Medicine and Department of Health Policy & Management, University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine, Pittsburgh, PA, USA.
Nancy E KassJohns Hopkins Berman Institute of Bioethics and Department of Health Policy and Management, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, MD, USA.
Scott Y H KimDepartment of Bioethics, National Institutes of Health Clinical Center, Bethesda, MD, USA.
Meeta P KerlinDepartment of Medicine, Division of Pulmonary, Allergy and Critical Care, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, USA.
Aisha T LangfordDepartment of Family Medicine and Public Health Sciences, Wayne State University School of Medicine, Detroit, MI, USA.
James V LaveryHubert Department of Global Health, Rollins School of Public Health, Center for Ethics, Emory University, Atlanta, GA, USA.
Daniel D MatlockDivision of Geriatric Medicine, Department of Medicine, University of Colorado School of Medicine, Aurora; VA Eastern Colorado Geriatric Research Education and Clinical Center, Denver, CO, USA.
Kathleen N FentonAdvanced Technologies and Surgery Branch, Division of Cardiovascular Sciences, National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute, and Department of Bioethics, National Institutes of Health Clinical Center, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD, USA.
George A MensahCenter for Translation Research and Implementation Science, National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD, USA.

Funding

Yale Clinical and Translational Science Award (U Component)UL1TR001863 · NCATS · YALE UNIVERSITY · PI John H. Krystal, LUCILA OHNO-MACHADO · 2016 to 2026
$102.9M
NCATS NIH HHS UL1 TR001863
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Ethical issues arise in the context of implementation science that may differ from those encountered in other research settings. This report, developed out of a workshop convened by the Center for Translation Research and Implementation Science within the United States National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute, identifies six key themes that are important to the assessment of ethical dimensions of implementation science. First, addressing ethical challenges in implementation science does not require new ethical principles, commitments, or regulations. However, it does require understanding of the specific contexts arising in implementation research related to both study design and the intervention being implemented. Second, implementation research involves many different types of people in research, including patients, clinicians, administrators, the social networks of any of these, and the general population. These individuals play different roles that may entail different ethical considerations, obligations, and vulnerabilities. Third, the appropriateness of and need for informed consent in implementation research is connected to the role of the subject/participant, the nature of the intervention, and the design of the study. Even where traditional "full" consent processes are unnecessary or inappropriate, communication and engagement are critical. Similarly, even when research is exempt and informed consent unnecessary, Data Safety and Monitoring Board oversight of implementation studies may be advisable to ensure quality, address unexpected consequences, and identify overwhelming evidence of benefit. Fourth, implementation science is often explicitly designed to encourage specific behaviors and discourage others. There is a need for clarity regarding when efforts at behavioral change enhance or threaten autonomy and how to protect participants whose autonomy is threatened. Fifth, there is significant overlap between implementation science and quality improvement, and the ideal regulatory oversight structure for implementation science remains unclear. It is critical to encourage learning and growth while assuring appropriate protections. Sixth, implementation research takes place across a range of social and cultural contexts. Engagement and collaboration with stakeholders in designing and executing implementation trials and studies- especially when vulnerabilities exist- is essential. Attention to these themes will help ensure that implementation science fulfills its goal of advancing the practice of health care within a sound ethical framework.

Indexed as

Implementation ScienceInformed ConsentNational Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute (U.S.)HumansResearch DesignUnited States

Identifiers

PMID39563405
PMCPMC11577597

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.