Vulnerable Research Participant Policies at U.S. Academic Institutions

Background: Historically, some of the worst abuses of human research participants have involved populations which are vulnerable to coercion, harm, or exploitation, such as prisoners, children, and people with compromised decision-making abilities. Although there has been considerable philosophical and ethical debate about how to protect vulnerable populations, there have been only a handful of empirical studies on vulnerable population policies. Methods: We conducted a cross-sectional study on vulnerable population policies from the 105 top funded U.S. academic research institutions. We used deductive and inductive methods to develop our framework for coding the policies. We tested for associations between policies and research and development expenditure rank, public vs. private status, geographic region, and Association for Accreditation of Human Research Protection Programs accreditation (AAHRRP). Results: U.S. academic institutions have a variety of policies for research with vulnerable populations. Every institution in our sample had at least 2 policies for research with vulnerable populations (including a general policy) and most had 8 or more. As expected, the most highly prevalent policies pertained to populations covered in subparts B, C, and D of the Common Rule (pregnant women, fetuses, neonates, prisoners, and children) but other groups were well-represented, including people with disabilities; people with impaired decision-making capacity; students/trainees; and people with limited English proficiency including illiteracy. AAHRRP accreditation was positively associated with eight different types of policies. Conclusion: U.S. academic institutions have a variety of policies for research with vulnerable populations. Additional research is needed to better understand the types of safeguards that institutions have adopted to protect vulnerable populations and the factors that influence policy development.