IRB and Research Regulatory Delays Within the Military Health System: Do They Really Matter? And If So,Why and for Whom?

Institutional review board (IRB) delays may hinder the successful completion of federally funded research in the U.S. military. When this happens, time-sensitive, mission-relevant questions go unanswered. Research participants face unnecessary burdens and risks if delays squeeze recruitment timelines, resulting in inadequate sample sizes for definitive analyses. More broadly, military members are exposed to untested or undertested interventions, implemented by well-intentioned leaders who bypass the research process altogether. To illustrate, we offer two case examples. We posit that IRB delays often appear in the service of managing institutional risk, rather than protecting research participants. Regulators may see more risk associated with moving quickly than risk related to delay, choosing to err on the side of bureaucracy. The authors of this article, all of whom are military-funded researchers, government stakeholders, and/or human subject protection experts, offer feasible recommendations to improve the IRB system and, ultimately, research within military, veteran, and civilian populations.     

Endogenous Ketamine-Like Compounds and the NDE: If So, So What?

This commentary on Karl Jansen's ketamine model for the near-death experience expands upon and raises additional questions about several issues and hypotheses: self-experimentation as a source of data; ketamine's similarities to and differences from classical hallucinogens; the need for quantification of unusual subjective states; clinical research and toxicological implications of this model; drugs as gateways to religious states; and evolutionary versus religious significance of naturally occurring compounds released in the near-death state. I suggest future research that could help explicate several of these areas.Formerly Associate Professor of Psychiatry at the University of New Mexico School of Medicine     

Commentary: Why Do Research on Spirituality and Health, and What Do the Results Mean?

I address two related questions in this article. First, why conduct research on religion/spirituality (R/S) and health? Second, what are the dangers of misinterpreting or misapplying the results from such research? If relationships are found, so what? What is the practical value or clinical relevance of such information? Why should investigators spend time and scarce financial resources to explore such connections? What might health care professionals do differently as a result? How would people live their lives differently in light of such information? Questions like these need solid answers for the field to continue to move forward. Related to the "So what?" question is the issue of how results from research in this area are translated into popular understanding and application. After discussing why conducting research on religion and health is important, I identify a recently published research report that focuses on the relationship between R/S and self-control, an article that received considerable media press coverage. I present the results reported by the authors of this study and then examine a column written about the study that appeared in the New York Times. Finally, I explore what the findings mean, how the media portrayed the findings, and problems that might result depending on how people applied those findings.     

Qualitative Research in Marriage and Family Therapy: Who is in the Interview?

Qualitative interviews are a rich means of gathering information from families. The qualitative interviewer has a choice of interviewing individual family members, multiple family members at the same time, or a combination. The configuration of interviewees is a choice guided by the epistemology of the researcher, research aims, and questions. This article reviews the literature on interviewing different configurations of family members. A content analysis was conducted on articles in the marriage and family therapy literature from 1990 to 2005. Over half of the articles were conducted with individual family members separate from their families. This finding is discussed in the context of the decision regarding whom to interview.     

Finding Spirits in Spirituality: What are We Measuring in Spirituality and Health Research?

Journal of Religion and Health - What are we asking when we ask about spirituality? When research subjects check survey boxes for “religiosity” and “spirituality” measures...     

Comparative Philosophy and the Tertium: Comparing What with What,and in What Respect?

Comparison is fundamental to the practice and subject-matter of philosophy, but has received scant attention by philosophers. This is even so in “comparative philosophy,” which literally distinguishes itself from other philosophy by being “comparative.” In this article, the need for a philosophy of comparison is suggested. What we compare with what, and in what respect it is done, poses a series of intriguing and intricate questions. In Part One, I offer a problematization of the tertium comparationis (the third of comparison) by examining conceptualizations of similarity, family resemblance, and analogy, which it is sometimes argued can do without a tertium comparationis. In Part Two, I argue that a third of comparison is already required to determine what is to be compared, and insofar as that determination precedes the comparison that tertium may be called “pre-comparative.” This leads me to argue against incomparability and to show how anything can indeed be compared to anything. In Part Three, I relate my arguments to what is today commonly labelled “comparative philosophy.” Finally, I raise some questions of ontology and politics in order to demonstrate the relevance of a philosophy of comparison.     

“For They Knew Not What It Was”: Rethinking the Tacit Narrative History of Religion and Health Research

Over the past couple of decades, research on religion and health has grown into a thriving field. Misperceptions about the history and scope of this field, however, continue to exist, especially among new investigators and commentators on this research. Contrary to the tacit narrative, published research and writing date to the nineteenth century, programmatic research to the 1950s, and NIH funding to 1990; elite medical journals have embraced this topic for over 100 years; study populations are religiously and sociodemographically diverse; and published findings are mostly positive, consistent with psychosocial theories of health and confirmed by comprehensive reviews and expert panels.     

Socioeconomic Status and Health: What is the role of Reserve Capacity?

ABSTRACT— A robust, linear association between socioeconomic status (SES) and health has been identified across many populations and health outcomes. This relationship is typically monotonic, so that each step down the SES hierarchy brings increased vulnerability to disease and premature mortality. Despite growing attention to health disparities, scientists and policymakers have made little progress toward confronting their causes and implementing effective solutions. Using the reserve capacity model ( Gallo & Matthews, 2003 ) as an organizing framework, the current article examines the contribution of resilient psychosocial resources to socioeconomic disparities in physical health. Findings suggest that deficient psychosocial resources, such as low perceptions of control and social support, may be one of many factors that connect low SES with poor health. Additional research is needed to test these relationships and their underlying mechanisms, to consider interventions to enhance reserve capacity, and to evaluate the efficacy of such efforts in fostering resilience to socioeconomic hardship.     

What is the Role of Culture in the Association of Relationships with Health?

There is now widespread recognition that relationships have important implications for health. To better understand this linkage, scholars have called for greater bridging between relationship science and the study of health. The goal of this paper is to raise awareness of another factor that needs to be incorporated into this area of study: culture. I recommend three steps that researchers can take to systematically incorporate culture into the study of relationships and health. First, I suggest four possible culture patterns to study: similarity, moderation, mediation, and novel constructs. Second, I suggest that theoretically meaningful cultural variation and multiple cultures be concurrently studied. The value of this strategy is highlighted via examples from three contexts that emphasize distinct approaches to self and emotion in relationships. Third, I suggest that key relationship processes in families and couples, two relationships with extensive implications for health, be studied. Selected studies of four relationship processes known to be relevant for health – expectations, formation and maintenance, emotions, and social support – are briefly reviewed to highlight the value of this focus. The theoretical and applied benefit of incorporating culture into the study of the association of relationships with health is discussed.     

Responsible Research: What is Expected?

"Responsible research" and "good science" are concepts with various meanings depending on one's perspective and assumptions. Fellow researchers, research participants, policy makers and the general public also have differing expectations of the benefits of research ranging from accurate and reliable data that extend the body of knowledge, to solutions to societal concerns. Unless these differing constituencies articulate their differing views they may fail to communicate and undermine the value of research to society.     

End of Life Pediatric Research: What About the Ethics?

Clinical trials are required in order to develop new treatments and improve both patient life expectancy and quality of life. In this respect the last 10 years proved their efficiency. However clinical research shows one of the most difficult dilemmas from an ethical point of view. Patients included in clinical trials are submitted to known and unknown risks and hazards, but rarely benefit from the results. This is even more evident when clinical trials use children who are terminally ill. The core consideration becomes how far should we go with research when considering the child best interest.     

Research in education: What influence on policy and practice?

This paper is set in a context where increased emphasis is being placed on the “consumer’s” role in research. It discusses the limitations of “knowledge base” approaches, which aim to deliver the findings of educational research to practitioners and policymakers. The tensions between what these consumers expect of research and what it can, in fact, offer are explored, and the conditions under which effective communication can be established are outlined and exemplified. It is argued, however, that the processes of such communication, if they are to establish the necessary engagement of consumers with researchers, will have to take account of the ways in which consumers are motivated and able to acquire new knowledge. In conclusion, it is argued that if the engagement is unsuccessful and the consumers are unconvinced of the value and validity of research findings for policy and practice, then researchers’ ideas will take a back seat in the debate about what is to count as high-quality work that should be funded. The function of research as the critical extension of knowledge may then be replaced by enquiry that comes up with the results the customer wants. Her current research interests are in the relationships among policy, practice and research, teachers’ thinking, provision for children with special educational needs and gender in education. Her best known recent book, with Donald McIntyre, isMaking Sense of Teaching (Open University Press).     

Protecting Human Health and Security in Digital Europe: How to Deal with the “Privacy Paradox”?

This article is the result of an international research between law and ethics scholars from Universities in France and Switzerland, who have been closely collaborating with technical experts on the design and use of information and communication technologies in the fields of human health and security. The interdisciplinary approach is a unique feature and guarantees important new insights in the social, ethical and legal implications of these technologies for the individual and society as a whole. Its aim is to shed light on the tension between secrecy and transparency in the digital era. A special focus is put from the perspectives of psychology, medical ethics and European law on the contradiction between individuals’ motivations for consented processing of personal data and their fears about unknown disclosure, transferal and sharing of personal data via information and communication technologies (named the “privacy paradox”). Potential benefits and harms for the individual and society resulting from the use of computers, mobile phones, the Internet and social media are being discussed. Furthermore, the authors point out the ethical and legal limitations inherent to the processing of personal data in a democratic society governed by the rule of law. Finally, they seek to demonstrate that the impact of information and communication technology use on the individuals’ well-being, the latter being closely correlated with a high level of fundamental rights protection in Europe, is a promising feature of the socalled “e-democracy” as a new way to collectively attribute meaning to large-scale online actions, motivations and ideas.     

A Review of “Relational Competence Theory: Research and Mental Health Applications”

Within the Couple and Family Therapy literature, there are few articles directly linking theory to treatment within the lesbian community. Utilizing contextual theory, the author presents a gay affirmative therapeutic approach to work with lesbian couples. The fundamental concepts of contextual therapy are uniquely suited for work with lesbian clients; particularly the four dimensions of individual psychology, relational ethics, systemic interaction, and facts. A case study is presented to highlight this therapeutic process. This article is one step in a larger systemic change related to the challenge of adapting theoretical methodology and gathering evidence for effective treatment of marginalized groups.