The difference between right and wrong isn’t always black and white. “I feel comfortable in grey areas,” says Sandra Auld, director of research ethics at U of G. “I get uncomfortable when people think there are absolute rights and wrongs.”
She applies that philosophy to the hundreds of studies she reviews each year that involve human participants. Whether a researcher is conducting a survey or measuring a participant’s heart rate on a stationary bicycle, any study that involves humans requires clearance from U of G’s Research Ethics Board (REB). Members include representatives from the colleges, an ethicist, a lawyer, a physician and a member of the public.
The first step in the approval process is to submit an application. “They need to describe what they’re going to do, what risks there may be for the participant, what benefits, if any, and how they’re going to keep the person’s identity private, if that is appropriate,” says Auld.
If the research involves minimal risk, it gets passed onto at least two members of REB for review. The members who are chosen to do the review may be from the same college as the researcher. If the study involves the external community, a community member may be asked to review it. Medical research gets reviewed by the board’s physician and other members.
The approval process for most studies usually takes about two weeks, depending on the complexity of the study and the number of changes that are required. Studies that are considered higher risk get reviewed by the entire board at a monthly meeting and may take longer to approve.
REB reviews each application to ensure the study’s risks are minimized, the benefits are maximized, and the prospective participants have all the information they need to decide whether they want to take part.
Auld says U of G ethics board rarely turns down a study. Instead, they work with researchers and advise them on how to meet the standards. The more complex the study, the more revisions may be required as the study goes back and forth between the board and the researcher.
“Our job is not to block research; it’s to make sure it complies with guidelines and regulations and goes ahead,” says Auld. “In our feedback, we try to give examples of what the researcher can do. Sometimes, the solutions are really simple: changing wording, making sure something is returned in a sealed envelope, or encrypting your computer to look after data.”
No matter how harmless a survey may seem, it must be approved by the board. “Surveys are not necessarily benign,” she says. “They need as much scrutiny as other studies.” The age of the participants and their ability to give informed consent must be taken into account. What may seem like a harmless survey for a university student, for example, may not be as harmless for a high school or elementary student. Surveys that ask participants about depression, being abused as a child or other personal questions require that the participants’ identities and demographic information be protected, says Auld. “If the information becomes public, it could have an effect on your life.”
REB reviews between 400 and 500 applications per year from researchers across campus. Auld says she enjoys working with U of G’s diverse group of undergrads, grad students and professors, but she usually doesn’t get to see the results of their studies. “Sometimes through At Guelph, I hear about results. I’ll see a news article and remember that there was a protocol for that research, and here’s what happened. That’s gratifying too.”
Auld has a master’s degree in philosophy from U of G and a master’s degree in nutrition from the University of Toronto.