Minimal Risk in Research Involving Pregnant Women and Fetuses

Overview

Journal J Law Med Ethics

Publisher Cambridge University Press

Specialties Forensic Sciences
General Medicine
Health Services
Medical Ethics

Date 2011 Aug 30

PMID 21871047

Citations 3

Authors

Carson Strong

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

The concept of minimal risk plays a key role in federal regulations on the protection of human research subjects. Although there has been considerable discussion of the meaning of minimal risk, the question of how this concept should be interpreted in research involving pregnant women and fetuses has not been addressed. This essay reviews the literature on minimal risk and argues for an interpretation of that concept in the context of research involving pregnant women and fetuses.

Citing Articles

Dietary intake and associated risk factors among pregnant women in Mbeya, Tanzania.

Killel E, Mchau G, Mbilikila H, Azizi K, Ngasa N, Hancy A PLOS Glob Public Health. 2024; 4(1):e0002529.

PMID: 38180949 PMC: 10769095. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pgph.0002529.

Establishing a Pregnancy Lyme Disease Biobank.

Naides S Methods Mol Biol. 2024; 2742:245-257.

PMID: 38165627 DOI: 10.1007/978-1-0716-3561-2_17.

Community-Engaged Approaches to Address the Ethical Concerns of Maternal Mental Health Disparities Research.

Hernandez N, Dorsey J, Glass D, Pope E, Worthy N, Blasingame E J Health Care Poor Underserved. 2019; 30(4S):12-20.

PMID: 31735713 PMC: 7245652. DOI: 10.1353/hpu.2019.0110.

References

. Protection of human subjects: categories of research that may be reviewed by the Institutional Review Board (IRB) through an expedited review procedure--FDA. Notice. Fed Regist. 1998; 63(216 Pt 1):60353-6. View

Michels T, Tiu A . Second trimester pregnancy loss. Am Fam Physician. 2007; 76(9):1341-6. View

Kopelman L . Minimal risk as an international ethical standard in research. J Med Philos. 2004; 29(3):351-78. DOI: 10.1080/03605310490500545. View

Coutelle C, Rodeck C . On the scientific and ethical issues of fetal somatic gene therapy. Gene Ther. 2002; 9(11):670-3. DOI: 10.1038/sj.gt.3301761. View

Miller P, Weijer C . Moral solutions in assessing research risk. IRB. 2002; 22(5):6-10. View

Wyatt P, Owolabi T, Meier C, Huang T . Age-specific risk of fetal loss observed in a second trimester serum screening population. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2005; 192(1):240-6. DOI: 10.1016/j.ajog.2004.06.099. View

. International ethical guidelines for biomedical research involving human subjects. Bull Med Ethics. 2004; (182):17-23. View

. ACOG Committee Opinion. Number 297, August 2004. Nonmedical use of obstetric ultrasonography. Obstet Gynecol. 2004; 104(2):423-4. DOI: 10.1097/00006250-200408000-00049. View

Freedman B, Fuks A, Weijer C . In loco parentis. Minimal risk as an ethical threshold for research upon children. Hastings Cent Rep. 1993; 23(2):13-9. View

10.

Wendler D, Belsky L, Thompson K, Emanuel E . Quantifying the federal minimal risk standard: implications for pediatric research without a prospect of direct benefit. JAMA. 2005; 294(7):826-32. DOI: 10.1001/jama.294.7.826. View

11.

Clapp 3rd J, Stepanchak W, Hashimoto K, Ehrenberg H, Lopez B . The natural history of antenatal nuchal cords. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2003; 189(2):488-93. DOI: 10.1067/s0002-9378(03)00371-5. View

12.

Fisher C, Kornetsky S, Prentice E . Determining risk in pediatric research with no prospect of direct benefit: time for a national consensus on the interpretation of federal regulations. Am J Bioeth. 2007; 7(3):5-10. DOI: 10.1080/15265160601171572. View

13.

Burton D, Filly R . Sonographic diagnosis of the amniotic band syndrome. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 1991; 156(3):555-8. DOI: 10.2214/ajr.156.3.1899757. View

14.

Weijer C . The ethical analysis of risk. J Law Med Ethics. 2001; 28(4):344-61. DOI: 10.1111/j.1748-720x.2000.tb00686.x. View

15.

Kopelman L . Estimating risk in human research. Clin Res. 1981; 29(1):1-8. View

16.

Waddington S, Kramer M, Hernandez-Alcoceba R, Buckley S, Themis M, Coutelle C . In utero gene therapy: current challenges and perspectives. Mol Ther. 2005; 11(5):661-76. DOI: 10.1016/j.ymthe.2005.01.015. View

17.

Shah S, Whittle A, Wilfond B, Gensler G, Wendler D . How do institutional review boards apply the federal risk and benefit standards for pediatric research?. JAMA. 2004; 291(4):476-82. DOI: 10.1001/jama.291.4.476. View

18.

Resnik D . Eliminating the daily life risks standard from the definition of minimal risk. J Med Ethics. 2005; 31(1):35-8. PMC: 1734001. DOI: 10.1136/jme.2004.010470. View

19.

Wendler D . Minimal risk in pediatric research as a function of age. Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med. 2009; 163(2):115-8. DOI: 10.1001/archpediatrics.2008.524. View

20.

Janofsky J, Starfield B . Assessment of risk in research on children. J Pediatr. 1981; 98(5):842-6. DOI: 10.1016/s0022-3476(81)80865-7. View