Beyond Criticism of Ethics Review Boards: Strategies for Engaging Research Communities and Enhancing Ethical Review Processes

Author(s):  
Andrew Hickey ◽  
Samantha Davis ◽  
Will Farmer ◽  
Julianna Dawidowicz ◽  
Clint Moloney ◽  
...  
2007 ◽  
Vol 14 (1) ◽  
pp. 99-116 ◽  
Author(s):  
Colin Macduff ◽  
Andrew McKie ◽  
Sheelagh Martindale ◽  
Anne Marie Rennie ◽  
Bernice West ◽  
...  

In the past decade structures and processes for the ethical review of UK health care research have undergone rapid change. Although this has focused users' attention on the functioning of review committees, it remains rare to read a substantive view from the inside. This article presents details of processes and findings resulting from a novel structured reflective exercise undertaken by a newly formed research ethics review panel in a university school of nursing and midwifery. By adopting and adapting some of the knowledge to be found in the art and science of malt whisky tasting, a framework for critical reflection is presented and applied. This enables analysis of the main contemporary issues for a review panel that is primarily concerned with research into nursing education and practice. In addition to structuring the panel's own literary narrative, the framework also generates useful visual representation for further reflection. Both the analysis of issues and the framework itself are presented as of potential value to all nurses, health care professionals and educationalists with an interest in ethical review.


2018 ◽  
Vol 25 (9-10) ◽  
pp. 862-865
Author(s):  
Kerry Earl Rinehart

Good research poetry evokes what may be learned from a study to audiences. Ethical review boards and approval committees, however, see the preservation of anonymity as a key concern. When poetic forms convey individual portraits of research participants, how might researchers craft a believable yet credible portrait instead of one where the person is recognizable to some audiences? The researcher, then, makes deliberate and intentional decisions regarding representation of research. No matter how “good” the poetry might be, the researcher’s presented work is the connection between audience (the public domain) and their research contribution (the public issue).


2017 ◽  
pp. 13-34 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rachel Douglas-Jones

This article examines the work that goes in to ‘making room’ for ethics, literally and figuratively. It follows the activities of a capacity building Asia-Pacific NGO in training and recognising ethics review committees, using multi-sited field materials collected over 12 months between 2009 and 2010. Two queries drive this article: first, how are spaces made for ethical review –politically, infrastructurally, materially ­– as committee members campaign for attention to ethics and access to offices in which to conduct their meetings? Second, how are the limits of ‘local circumstance’ negotiated during a review of the committee’s work: what does the implementation of standards in the area of ethics look like? I then discuss what standards of ethics practice mean for more fraught questions of the universal in bioethics. Rather than regarding ethics systems as backgrounds to global health projects, this article’s STS and ethnographic approach reveals ethical review as a site of contested standardisation.


2016 ◽  
Vol 14 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-14
Author(s):  
Dimpho Ralefala ◽  
Joseph Ali ◽  
Nancy Kass ◽  
Adnan Hyder

Most countries, including Botswana, have established Institutional Review Boards (IRBs) to provide oversight of research involving human beings. Although much has been published on the structure and function of IRBs around the world, there is less literature that empirically describes the perspectives of stakeholders in low- and middle-income country (LMIC) settings regarding IRB processes. In this study, we employed primarily quantitative methods to examine the perceptions of researchers at the University of Botswana (UB) about the review of research protocols by local IRBs. Data were collected using a web-based survey (SurveyMonkey1). This was a preliminary effort to document some of the emerging experiences of researchers with ethics review in a context where both research and research oversight are relatively new. Findings from 85 researchers indicate that researchers recognized the need for an IRB to review all human research protocols, expressed the need for research ethics training, experienced high rates of approval at government ministries and UB, and generally believed that ethics review processes can help researchers themselves better understand and appreciate research ethics in general. Though only about one-quarter of respondents reported a more positive view of research ethics after interacting with the UB IRB, 56.5 percent reported no change. In contexts where IRBs have recently been established, it can be particularly important to document the perspectives of researchers in order to align expectations with capabilities, and identify areas where IRBs can improve operations. Future efforts to advance research ethics and ethical review in Botswana should include establishing research ethics training requirements and courses for researchers, increasing investment in IRBs and their training, further developing institutional and national research ethics policies, and formalizing agreements between IRBs and others involved in research oversight in the country to support coordinated review.


Author(s):  
Tom Clark ◽  
Liam Foster ◽  
Alan Bryman

Ethics play a vital part of the research process. They provide a set of value-based principles that enable research to be conducted in an appropriate manner. Research ethics help ensure that the relationships built during the process of conducting social research are respectful and constructive, and that the student’s project does not endanger either the student or those he or she comes into contact with. This chapter provides an introduction to the practice of ethics in social research. It provides an outline of basic ethical practice, before discussing the nature and purpose of ethical review boards. It demonstrates how ethical rules of thumb are often more complicated when encountering them ‘in the field’. Finally, it explores how ethics also informs the process of writing up research.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document