Rethinking ethical reflexivity and oversight in health research through an ecosystem approach: A workshop report.

IF 2.9 Q2 ETHICS
Research Ethics Pub Date : 2026-01-01 Epub Date: 2025-09-12 DOI:10.1177/17470161251346253
Katharine Wright, Joseph Ali, Caesar Atuire, Phaik Yeong Cheah, Anna Chiumento, Agata Ferretti, Adrienne Hunt, Sharon Kaur, Rachel L Knowles, Carleigh B Krubiner, Florencia Luna, Paul Ndebele, Ana Palmero, James Shaw, Effy Vayena, Teck Chuan Voo, Jantina de Vries, Katherine Littler
{"title":"Rethinking ethical reflexivity and oversight in health research through an ecosystem approach: A workshop report.","authors":"Katharine Wright, Joseph Ali, Caesar Atuire, Phaik Yeong Cheah, Anna Chiumento, Agata Ferretti, Adrienne Hunt, Sharon Kaur, Rachel L Knowles, Carleigh B Krubiner, Florencia Luna, Paul Ndebele, Ana Palmero, James Shaw, Effy Vayena, Teck Chuan Voo, Jantina de Vries, Katherine Littler","doi":"10.1177/17470161251346253","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>As the scope of morally relevant considerations widens and new challenges emerge at the frontiers of health innovation, there are questions about the appropriate role and remit for research ethics review, within the broader context of the whole health research ecosystem. Drawing on discussion at a satellite meeting at the 2022 Global Forum on Bioethics in Research in Cape Town, we argue that the ethical conduct of research is the responsibility of <i>all</i> stakeholders in the research ecosystem - from funders, governments and research institutions to individual research teams and ethics committees. As a research community we need to espouse, and take action to achieve, more distributed approaches to ethical scrutiny and reflexivity. A crucial element of such a shift should be the development of collaborative and non-adversarial relationships between researchers and ethics committees that recognise and respect the mutual responsibilities of all parties to promote ethical research conduct. In tandem with the development of systems to support the exercise of ethical responsibilities across the research ecosystem, committees need to reconceptualise their role, in partnership with communities, as one of providing accountability through a focus on how research promotes participant agency and the common good.</p>","PeriodicalId":38096,"journal":{"name":"Research Ethics","volume":"22 1","pages":"168-183"},"PeriodicalIF":2.9000,"publicationDate":"2026-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC13367892/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Research Ethics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/17470161251346253","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/9/12 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ETHICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

As the scope of morally relevant considerations widens and new challenges emerge at the frontiers of health innovation, there are questions about the appropriate role and remit for research ethics review, within the broader context of the whole health research ecosystem. Drawing on discussion at a satellite meeting at the 2022 Global Forum on Bioethics in Research in Cape Town, we argue that the ethical conduct of research is the responsibility of all stakeholders in the research ecosystem - from funders, governments and research institutions to individual research teams and ethics committees. As a research community we need to espouse, and take action to achieve, more distributed approaches to ethical scrutiny and reflexivity. A crucial element of such a shift should be the development of collaborative and non-adversarial relationships between researchers and ethics committees that recognise and respect the mutual responsibilities of all parties to promote ethical research conduct. In tandem with the development of systems to support the exercise of ethical responsibilities across the research ecosystem, committees need to reconceptualise their role, in partnership with communities, as one of providing accountability through a focus on how research promotes participant agency and the common good.

通过生态系统方法重新思考卫生研究中的伦理反身性和监督:研讨会报告。
随着道德相关考虑范围的扩大和卫生创新前沿出现的新挑战,在整个卫生研究生态系统的更广泛背景下,研究伦理审查的适当作用和职权范围存在问题。根据2022年在开普敦举行的全球研究生物伦理论坛卫星会议上的讨论,我们认为研究的伦理行为是研究生态系统中所有利益相关者的责任——从资助者、政府和研究机构到个人研究团队和伦理委员会。作为一个研究团体,我们需要支持并采取行动实现更多分布式的伦理审查和反思方法。这种转变的一个关键因素应该是在研究人员和伦理委员会之间发展合作和非对抗性的关系,这种关系承认和尊重所有各方促进伦理研究行为的相互责任。在开发支持整个研究生态系统履行伦理责任的系统的同时,委员会需要与社区合作,重新定义他们的角色,通过关注研究如何促进参与者机构和共同利益来提供问责制。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Research Ethics
Research Ethics Arts and Humanities-Philosophy
CiteScore
4.30
自引率
11.80%
发文量
17
审稿时长
15 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书