Research Ethics最新文献_第3页

Planning a ‘negligible risk’ national health service survey? Counting the cost and strategies for success: a short report 计划进行一项“可忽略风险”的全国卫生服务调查?计算成本和成功的策略:一个简短的报告

IF 1.7

Research Ethics Pub Date : 2023-07-31 DOI: 10.1177/17470161231189602

Laura Cooper, K. Johnston, Marie Williams

引用次数: 0

Defining institutional review board application quality: critical research gaps and future opportunities 定义机构审查委员会申请质量:关键的研究差距和未来的机会

IF 1.7

Research Ethics Pub Date : 2023-07-27 DOI: 10.1177/17470161231187099

Kimberley Serpico

{"title":"Defining institutional review board application quality: critical research gaps and future opportunities","authors":"Kimberley Serpico","doi":"10.1177/17470161231187099","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/17470161231187099","url":null,"abstract":"The quality of a research study application sends a distinct signal to the institutional review board (IRB) about the skills, capacities, preparation, communication, experience, and resources of its authors. However, efforts to research and define IRB application quality have been insufficient. Inattention to the quality of an IRB application is consequential because the application precedes IRB review, and perceptions of quality between the two may be interrelated and interdependent. Without a clear understanding of quality, IRBs do not know how to define quality and researchers do not know how to achieve quality. This position has not been systematically studied to date, and future research could provide much-needed empirical validation. This paper lays the conceptual groundwork for future investigation into what constitutes quality in an IRB application. It includes a landscape review of multidisciplinary research on quality, as well as a discussion of quality frameworks analogous to research with human participants that exist in the published literature. It also examines the background and significance of federal research regulations, regulatory burdens, researchers’ regulatory literacy, and the roles and responsibilities of IRB professionals within this ecosystem.","PeriodicalId":38096,"journal":{"name":"Research Ethics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.7,"publicationDate":"2023-07-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"75122564","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Protected from harm, harmed by protection: ethical consequences of the exclusion of pregnant participants from clinical trials 保护免受伤害，被保护伤害:将怀孕参与者排除在临床试验之外的伦理后果

IF 1.7

Research Ethics Pub Date : 2023-07-25 DOI: 10.1177/17470161231189843

R. Zur

{"title":"Protected from harm, harmed by protection: ethical consequences of the exclusion of pregnant participants from clinical trials","authors":"R. Zur","doi":"10.1177/17470161231189843","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/17470161231189843","url":null,"abstract":"Pregnancy is a frequently applied exclusion criteria for many forms of research. Common justifications for this exclusion include the potential for teratogenicity, as well as the potential for physiologic changes in pregnancy to impact the research itself. The systematic exclusion of pregnant persons from clinical studies has created a significant gap in knowledge regarding medication safety and efficacy in pregnancy, which continues to cause significant harm to pregnant persons in need of medical therapy. To produce meaningful data and facilitate effective knowledge translation to the clinical setting, special consideration to the pharmacology of pregnancy, as well as to outcomes of concern for this population is essential. The exclusion of pregnant participants from research is not ethically justifiable, as it violates the principles of autonomy, justice and nonmaleficence. While the inclusion of pregnant patients in research presents it’s own challenges, with appropriate methodological, ethical, and clinical considerations, we may be able to narrow the knowledge gap and improve drug availability and safety for pregnant patients and their children.","PeriodicalId":38096,"journal":{"name":"Research Ethics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.7,"publicationDate":"2023-07-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"73739519","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Who reviews what you do at the zoo? Considerations for research ethics with captive exotic animals 谁评论你在动物园做的事?对圈养外来动物研究伦理的考虑

IF 1.7

Research Ethics Pub Date : 2023-07-25 DOI: 10.1177/17470161231188615

E. Fernandez, Todd J. McWhorter

引用次数: 1

Reconceptualizing participant vulnerability in Scholarship of Teaching and Learning research: exploring the perspectives of health faculty students in Aotearoa New Zealand 重新定义教学和学习研究中的参与者脆弱性:探索新西兰奥特罗阿卫生学院学生的观点

IF 1.7

Research Ethics Pub Date : 2023-07-25 DOI: 10.1177/17470161231188720

A. Lees, R. Godbold, S. Walters

{"title":"Reconceptualizing participant vulnerability in Scholarship of Teaching and Learning research: exploring the perspectives of health faculty students in Aotearoa New Zealand","authors":"A. Lees, R. Godbold, S. Walters","doi":"10.1177/17470161231188720","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/17470161231188720","url":null,"abstract":"While the need to protect vulnerable research participants is universal, conceptual challenges with the notion of vulnerability may result in the under or over-protection of participants. Ethics review bodies making assumptions about who is vulnerable and in what circumstance can be viewed as paternalistic if they do not consider participant viewpoints. Our study focuses on participant vulnerability in Scholarship of Teaching and Learning (SoTL) research. We aim to illuminate students’ views on participant vulnerability to contribute to critical analysis of the role and processes of ethics review. Additionally, we aim to highlight the importance of seeking the views of participant communities, especially in research environments beyond ethics review’s medical origins. Thirty-four students from a health-related faculty at a university in Aotearoa New Zealand, participated in five focus groups. Participants discussed factors affecting their potential participation in research drawing upon a series of vignettes based on examples of published SoTL projects. Themes, generated using reflexive thematic analysis, built a participant-informed picture of vulnerability. Findings indicate that students do not generally consider themselves vulnerable and instead consider participation in SoTL research through an agentic lens. Students expect that participation will be voluntary, not negatively impact their grades, and not single them out so that others could judge them. Our study also highlights the value students place on relationships with one another and teaching staff and the implications these have for SoTL research participation and future professional practice. This research challenges research ethics committees to think further about vulnerability in the context of SoTL whilst highlighting the importance of providing opportunities for research participants more broadly to explore and vocalize their views as members of participant communities.","PeriodicalId":38096,"journal":{"name":"Research Ethics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.7,"publicationDate":"2023-07-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"84931430","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Shifting attitudes on animal ‘ownership’: Ethical implications for welfare research and practice terminology 对动物“所有权”态度的转变:福利研究和实践术语的伦理含义

IF 1.7

Research Ethics Pub Date : 2023-07-11 DOI: 10.1177/17470161231186060

Julia Henning, Ana Goncalves Costa, E. Fernandez

引用次数: 0

Ethical considerations and dilemmas for the researcher and for families in home-based research: A case for situated ethics 基于家庭的研究中研究者和家庭的伦理考虑和困境:一个情境伦理的案例

IF 1.7

Research Ethics Pub Date : 2023-07-03 DOI: 10.1177/17470161231181860

I. Palaiologou, Alice V. Brown

{"title":"Ethical considerations and dilemmas for the researcher and for families in home-based research: A case for situated ethics","authors":"I. Palaiologou, Alice V. Brown","doi":"10.1177/17470161231181860","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/17470161231181860","url":null,"abstract":"When researching with or about families in home-based research, there are numerous unexpected ethical issues that can emerge, particularly in qualitative research. This paper is based on reflective accounts of four homed-based research projects, two in the UK and two Australia, which examined ethical dilemmas identified when engaged in home-based research with young children. Using a synergy of ecocultural theory and Foucauldian ideas of Heterotopia as theoretical conceptualisations, the authors employed reflective lenses to guide their approach, and examine dilemmas and complexities when conducting research in the home. We argue that, to address ethical dilemmas, researchers need to problematise and reflect upon the nature of respectful approaches and the ethical implications of their behaviours. We conclude that, although ethical codes are valuable when researching families at home, researchers should plan for and forefront their methodological approaches in ways that are family-centred, whilst also framed by practices that are ethical, respectful and reflective to the situated contexts of family’s ecologies and heterotopias.","PeriodicalId":38096,"journal":{"name":"Research Ethics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.7,"publicationDate":"2023-07-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"80122773","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Erratum to “Using wearable cameras to investigate health-related daily life experiences: A literature review of precautions and risks in empirical studies” “使用可穿戴相机调查与健康相关的日常生活体验:实证研究中的预防措施和风险的文献综述”的勘误

IF 1.7

Research Ethics Pub Date : 2023-07-01 DOI: 10.1177/17470161231159486

引用次数: 0

Opinions and attitudes of research ethics committees in Arab countries in the Middle East and North African region toward ethical issues involving biobank research 中东北非地区阿拉伯国家研究伦理委员会对涉及生物样本库研究的伦理问题的看法和态度

IF 1.7

Research Ethics Pub Date : 2023-06-29 DOI: 10.1177/17470161231185510

Zeinab Mohammed, F. Abdelgawad, M. Ahram, M. E. Ibrahim, A. Elgamri, Ehsan B. Gamel, L. Adarmouch, K. Rhazi, S. Abd ElHafeez, H. Silverman

引用次数: 0

Agreement of farm animal behaviour and welfare studies with the ARRIVE Essential 10 农场动物行为和福利研究与抵达基本10的协议

IF 1.7

Research Ethics Pub Date : 2023-06-29 DOI: 10.1177/17470161231183100

J. Calderón-Amor, Daniela Luna, T. Tadich

{"title":"Agreement of farm animal behaviour and welfare studies with the ARRIVE Essential 10","authors":"J. Calderón-Amor, Daniela Luna, T. Tadich","doi":"10.1177/17470161231183100","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/17470161231183100","url":null,"abstract":"The inclusion of animals in research studies involves a great responsibility to ensure animal welfare within the relevant ethical and legal frameworks. This study aimed to review compliance with the ARRIVE Essential 10 requirements and the ethical oversight of animal behaviour and welfare studies in farm animals. Three journals and a total of 133 articles were reviewed for compliance with the ARRIVE Essential 10 items and criteria. Each article obtained a final score according to whether or not each criterion was met within each item. Likewise, ethical declaration in each article was recorded. Chi-square test and linear models were built to assess associations between the ethical statement presentation and the final ARRIVE Essential 10 score with the country, the species, and the journal. We found that 15% of the articles did not present an ethical statement. The journal with the highest impact factor and the countries of the Global South presented an ethical statement more frequently. Regarding the Essential 10, the item with the lowest agreement score was ‘Blinding’ and the one with the highest agreement was ‘Outcome Measures’. Also, significant differences were found between journals in terms of the Essential 10 score. Essential 10 provides relevant information that allows reviewers and readers to identify possible welfare risks and the validity of the results in animal welfare science publications.","PeriodicalId":38096,"journal":{"name":"Research Ethics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.7,"publicationDate":"2023-06-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"74741590","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0