Search

Over recent years, the research community has been increasingly using preprint servers to share manuscripts that are not yet peer-reviewed. Even if it enables quick dissemination of research findings, this practice raises several challenges in publication ethics and integrity. In particular, preprints have become an important source of information for stakeholders interested in COVID19 research developments, including traditional media, social media, and policy makers. Despite caveats about their nature, many users can still confuse pre-prints with peer-reviewed manuscripts. If unconfirmed but already widely shared first-draft results later prove wrong or misinterpreted, it can be very difficult to “unlearn” what we thought was true. Complexity further increases if unconfirmed findings have been used to inform guidelines. To help achieve a balance between early access to research findings and its negative consequences, we formulated five recommendations: (a) consensus should be sought on a term clearer than ‘pre-print’, such as ‘Unrefereed manuscript’, “Manuscript awaiting peer review” or ‘’Non-reviewed manuscript”; (b) Caveats about unrefereed manuscripts should be prominent on their first page, and each page should include a red watermark stating ‘Caution—Not Peer Reviewed’; (c) pre-print authors should certify that their manuscript will be submitted to a peer-review journal, and should regularly update the manuscript status; (d) high level consultations should be convened, to formulate clear principles and policies for the publication and dissemination of non-peer reviewed research results; (e) in the longer term, an international initiative to certify servers that comply with good practices could be envisaged.

A considerable number of clinical trials is being conducted globally in response to the COVID-19 pandemic, including in low- and middle-income countries such as those in the Latin America and Caribbean region (LAC). Yet, an abundance of studies does not necessarily shorten the path to find safe and efficacious interventions for COVID-19. We analyze the trials for COVID-19 treatment and prevention that are registered from LAC countries in the International Clinical Trials Registry Platform, and identify a trend towards small repetitive non-rigorous studies that duplicate efforts and drain limited resources without producing meaningful conclusions on the safety and efficacy of the interventions being tested. We further assess the challenges to conducting scientifically sound and socially valuable research in the LAC region in order to inform recommendations to encourage clinical trials that are most likely to produce robust evidence during the pandemic.Se está llevando a cabo un número considerable de ensayos clínicos en todo el mundo en respuesta a la pandemia de COVID-19, incluso en países de ingresos bajos y medios como los de la región de América Latina y el Caribe. Sin embargo, la abundancia de estudios no necesariamente acorta el camino para encontrar intervenciones seguras y eficaces frente a la COVID-19. Se analizaron los ensayos para el tratamiento y la prevención de la COVID-19 de los países de América Latina y el Caribe que están registrados en la Plataforma de Registros Internacionales de Ensayos Clínicos de la Organización Mundial de la Salud, y se identificó una tendencia hacia la realización de estudios pequeños, repetitivos y no rigurosos que duplican los esfuerzos y merman recursos limitados sin producir conclusiones significativas sobre la seguridad y la eficacia de las intervenciones evaluadas. Se evaluaron asimismo los desafíos que plantea la realización de investigaciones científicamente sólidas y socialmente valiosas en la región de América Latina y el Caribe a fin de brindar recomendaciones que alienten la realización de ensayos clínicos que tengan más probabilidades de producir evidencia sólida durante la pandemia.

Realizar investigaciones para dar respuestas a la pandemia de COVID-19 es un deber moral. Con el objetivo de acelerar la evaluación de las investigaciones y asegurar su rigurosidad científica y ética, el Ministerio de Salud aprobó un documento de pautas éticas y operativas. El documento aborda los aspectos a los cuales se debe prestar especial atención durante la pandemia y brinda orientación a los Comités de Ética en Investigación para la elaboración de procedimientos operativos que acorten los plazos de la evaluación. Este artículo describe los puntos clave del documento

Background Research has been an essential part of the COVID-19 pandemic response, including in Latin American (LA) countries. However, implementing research in emergency settings poses the challenge of producing valuable knowledge rapidly while upholding research ethical standards. Research ethics committees (RECs) therefore must conduct timely and rigorous ethics reviews and oversight of COVID-19 research. In the LA region, there is limited knowledge on how countries have responded to this need. To address this gap, the objective of our project is to explore if LA countries developed policies to streamline ethics review and oversight of research in response to the pandemic while ensuring its adherence to ethical standards, and to analyze to what extent these governance frameworks are in accordance with international guidance. Methods We conducted a descriptive and exploratory study assessing the COVID-19 research ethics governance frameworks of 19 LA countries, considering 4 dimensions based on international COVID-19 ethics guidance documents: (i) ethics review organizational model adopted, (ii) measures to coordinate between RECs and other research stakeholders, (iii) operational guidance for RECs, and (iv) key ethical issues for review and oversight of COVID-19 research. Results 10 out of 19 LA countries have some policy to streamline ethics review of COVID-19 research. Of these countries only 6 issued comprehensive documents following international guidance that contemplate strategies with recommendations for concrete actions for a timely and rigorous review. Conclusion LA countries adopted partial strategies and operational guidance that may demonstrate a lack of a comprehensive view of research ethics for the review and oversight of COVID-19 research. Continuing efforts should be directed to strengthen LA countries' research capacity to respond timely and ethically to future health emergencies. Past lessons and the ones from this pandemic should be the basis to develop international standards and operational guidelines for ethics review and oversight of any research for public health emergencies.

El fortalecimiento y armonización de los criterios de evaluación de los comités de ética en investigación del país son objetivos de la Dirección de Investigación para la Salud y del Comité Nacional Asesor de Ética en Investigación. El presente artículo se propone describir las fortalezas y debilidades que han sido identificadas en el sistema de revisión ética de las provincias y que ayudarán a definir las próximas estrategias en la materia.

La investigación clínica que involucra a personas adultas con capacidad limitada o sin capacidad de comprensión plantea problemas éticos y legales, en particular en lo referente a la obtención del consentimiento informado. Ante la incertidumbre creada por las diferentes soluciones que ofrecen las normas existentes, la Dirección de Investigación para la Salud junto con la Administración Nacional de Medicamentos, Alimentos y Tecnología Médica realizaron un taller para clarificar los requisitos legales de este proceso.

Compelling individuals to be vaccinated with candidate vaccines that have been granted emergency use approval based on limited data, and penalising non-compliance, raises challenging ethics issues. For instance, some individuals may wish to be vaccinated, but may be hesitant to be vaccinated with particular vaccine candidates. On the other hand, some individuals may be averse to vaccination of any sort but may find themselves being forced to submit to vaccination in certain situational contexts to gain access to benefits or services. In all such instances, acquiescence and submission runs counter to the notion of voluntariness, which is a central pillar of the doctrine of informed consent.

Uno de los objetivos rectores de la Dirección es promover políticas de investigación en salud. Considerando la importancia de incluir una perspectiva de género en las investigaciones en salud, el presente artículo se propone caracterizar el financiamiento otorgado a estudios que hayan incorporado esta perspectiva durante el período 2010-2017

Tracheal bronchus (TRB) has been generally considered an anatomical variant of the tracheobronchial tree without a precise pathological effect. Its prevalence is estimated to be between 0.2% to 3% of all children undergoing bronchoscopy and scientific information has been limited to case reports or small case series. Our working hypothesis was that TRB could trigger by itself recurrent or persistent respiratory symptoms. The objective of this retrospective and multicentre study of children with a diagnosis of TRB, coming from the main paediatric pulmonology units of Spain, was to determine the anatomical and clinical characteristics, including comorbidities, of TRB in childhood and their impact in the patients' clinical outcomes. One hundred thirty-three patients from 13 institutions were included in the study. Mean diagnostic age was 3.4 years and flexible bronchoscopy was the initial diagnostic method in 85% of cases. All TRB were located on the right wall of the trachea: 76% in the lower third and 24% in the carina. The most common clinical manifestations were obstructive bronchitis (53.3%) and recurrent pneumonia (46.6%), usually affecting the right upper lobe. Regarding associated anomalies, 33% had tracheomalacia, 32% congenital cardiovascular malformations, 28% gastroesophageal reflux, 22.5% congenital tracheal stenosis, and 8.3% Down syndrome. This series appears to be the most extensive published to date addressing this topic and, according to our data, TRB does not appear to be a mere incidental finding but is more likely linked to a wide range of congenital anomalies and contributes by itself to the recurrent respiratory symptomatology that these children exhibit.

En las investigaciones donde participan seres humanos, la exposición a riesgos obliga a contar con herramientas que permitan al Estado garantizar la protección de derechos de esos participantes. El Comité Nacional Asesor de Ética en Investigación asesorará al Ministerio de Salud y proporcionará directrices para establecer las pautas éticas en investigación, como parte fundamental de un Sistema Nacional de Investigaciones para la Salud

This paper considers how ethical norms on sharing of human biological materials and related data in international policy documents diffuse from global forums to national policies and practices. With focus on the domestic policies of four countries (i.e. Guinea, Argentina, India and Malawi), this paper seeks to explain policy diffusion by broadly applying an analytical framework wherein policy learning is one of four theories used to explain how countries learn policy norms from expert epistemic communities and international organizations. While the governance structures of all four countries broadly incorporate key ethical provisions in international policy documents on sharing of biological materials and related data for biomedical research, relative emphasis on certain provisions differ among them. In three of these countries (i.e. Guinea, Argentina and India), international ethical norms have had direct influence over their domestic governance policies. Their impact has been greatest for Guinea and Argentina, whose governance policies had to be adapted in response to the Ebola virus epidemic in West Africa and the Zika virus epidemic in Latin America. In both countries, sharing of biological materials and related data with international organisations increased significantly to meet therapeutic and research needs during the outbreaks. International organisations have had a comparatively greater role in bringing about policy change in Guinea when compared with Argentina, mainly due to the fragility of the health system in Guinea in 2014. In contrast, policy in India and in Malawi occurred under less strenuous conditions. This may account for the relatively greater emphasis on control and limits to cross-border transferability in their policies when compared with those of Guinea and Argentina. While all four countries have made significant progress in establishing accountable governance arrangements, still more needs to be done to ensure that the ethical goal of equitable sharing of benefits is realised.