Citation

Internal review boards and protecting human subjects in Latin America

Abstract | Word Stems | Keywords | Association | Citation | Similar Titles



Abstract:

The recent uncovering of unethical behavior by NIH-funded syphilis researchers in Guatemala between 1946 and 1948 has renewed the call for oversight conducted on venerable populations. Yet since its inception, the university institutional review board (IRB) has been criticized for being out of touch with research protocol in the social sciences especially outside of US borders. In this study we examine the compatibility of Eurocentric IRB requirements and approval in researching cultures in Latin America using an indigenous research framework. Our framework questions the IRB gate-keeping function in the development of research design and structure which we argue is tantamount to the colonizing of non-Eurocentric academic research and the privileging of Western research in its attempts to represent the “other” through scientific reporting. This translates directly to what ideas are promoted and what programs are funded at local as well as global levels. We utilized a qualitative research methodology to collect and analyze a variety of materials at numerous levels, including the examination and interrogation of our own research conducted over the past 12 years in Chile and Costa Rica. In addition we examine how Costa Rica and Chile universities have implemented their own human subjects review protocol. Findings suggest that while IRB guidelines in these countries have been copied from US institutions, there are drastic differences in interpretation and implementation of what counts as the protection of human subject research.

Author's Keywords:

Human Subject Protection; Research Protocol Outside the United States
Convention
All Academic Convention is the premier solution for your association's abstract management solutions needs.
Submission - Custom fields, multiple submission types, tracks, audio visual, multiple upload formats, automatic conversion to pdf.Review - Peer Review, Bulk reviewer assignment, bulk emails, ranking, z-score statistics, and multiple worksheets!
Reports - Many standard and custom reports generated while you wait. Print programs with participant indexes, event grids, and more!Scheduling - Flexible and convenient grid scheduling within rooms and buildings. Conflict checking and advanced filtering.
Communication - Bulk email tools to help your administrators send reminders and responses. Use form letters, a message center, and much more!Management - Search tools, duplicate people management, editing tools, submission transfers, many tools to manage a variety of conference management headaches!
Click here for more information.

Association:
Name: 55th Annual Conference of the Comparative and International Education Society
URL:
http://www.cies.us


Citation:
URL: http://citation.allacademic.com/meta/p486152_index.html
Direct Link:
HTML Code:

MLA Citation:

Locke, Steven., Ovando, Carlos. and Montecinos, Carmen. "Internal review boards and protecting human subjects in Latin America" Paper presented at the annual meeting of the 55th Annual Conference of the Comparative and International Education Society, Fairmont Le Reine Elizabeth, Montreal, Quebec, Canada, Apr 30, 2011 <Not Available>. 2014-11-26 <http://citation.allacademic.com/meta/p486152_index.html>

APA Citation:

Locke, S. , Ovando, C. J. and Montecinos, C. , 2011-04-30 "Internal review boards and protecting human subjects in Latin America" Paper presented at the annual meeting of the 55th Annual Conference of the Comparative and International Education Society, Fairmont Le Reine Elizabeth, Montreal, Quebec, Canada <Not Available>. 2014-11-26 from http://citation.allacademic.com/meta/p486152_index.html

Publication Type: Conference Paper/Unpublished Manuscript
Review Method: Peer Reviewed
Abstract: The recent uncovering of unethical behavior by NIH-funded syphilis researchers in Guatemala between 1946 and 1948 has renewed the call for oversight conducted on venerable populations. Yet since its inception, the university institutional review board (IRB) has been criticized for being out of touch with research protocol in the social sciences especially outside of US borders. In this study we examine the compatibility of Eurocentric IRB requirements and approval in researching cultures in Latin America using an indigenous research framework. Our framework questions the IRB gate-keeping function in the development of research design and structure which we argue is tantamount to the colonizing of non-Eurocentric academic research and the privileging of Western research in its attempts to represent the “other” through scientific reporting. This translates directly to what ideas are promoted and what programs are funded at local as well as global levels. We utilized a qualitative research methodology to collect and analyze a variety of materials at numerous levels, including the examination and interrogation of our own research conducted over the past 12 years in Chile and Costa Rica. In addition we examine how Costa Rica and Chile universities have implemented their own human subjects review protocol. Findings suggest that while IRB guidelines in these countries have been copied from US institutions, there are drastic differences in interpretation and implementation of what counts as the protection of human subject research.


Similar Titles:
Regional Protection of Human Rights as Field of Research of Human Rights, Comparative Politics, International Law and International Organization Theory

The Social Mores of Human Research Protections: A Sociological Perspective on Institutional Review Boards


 
All Academic, Inc. is your premier source for research and conference management. Visit our website, www.allacademic.com, to see how we can help you today.