IRB Consent Guidelines: Potential Barriers to Diversity in Research.

Abstract

Despite initiatives aimed at improving study participation and inclusion among ethnic and racially minoritized and marginalized populations, participation remains low. While necessary to ensure ethical practice in human participant research, certain Institutional Review Board (IRB) guidelines may introduce additional barriers in research involving these populations. This work outlines guidelines pertaining to consent translation for non-English speaking populations and offers discussion on a greater emphasis for more inclusive methods for marginalized communities. The University of Wisconsin's IRB approved alternative oral consent processes after the community partner determined that standard translation processes would be inefficient. Researchers used translated consent materials for four different ethnic groups (Hmong, Karen, Karenni, and Burmese). We provided recorded consents in each respective language to participants before study participation and obtained verbal consent prior to study participation at the study location. We experienced time and resource constraints in both access to translators and the consent-translation process itself. Furthermore, many participants were unable to read in their native language making standard written consent processes both difficult and impractical. Oral discussion and verbal consent processes were efficient. Adjustments to consent-related guidelines may prevent and eliminate time and resource-related barriers in consent processes. In eliminating such barriers, subsequent improved efficiency in both study design and study promotion areas can work to better promote diversity in research among populations that emphasize oral language and in instances where literacy rates in written non-English language may be lower.