Will the Canadian Institute for Health Research Save Clinical Research in Obstetrics and Gynaecology?

Journal SOGC ◽  
1999 ◽  
Vol 21 (12) ◽  
pp. 1134-1135
Author(s):  
B.F. Mitchell
2016 ◽  
Vol 2016 ◽  
pp. 1-5
Author(s):  
R. Deonandan ◽  
E. Y. Liu ◽  
B. Kolisnyk ◽  
A. T. M. Konkle

We examined patterns of Canadian Institute for Health Research (CIHR) funding on autism spectrum disorder (ASD) research. From 1999 to 2013, CIHR funded 190 ASD grants worth $48 million. Biomedical research received 43% of grants (46% of dollars), clinical research 27% (41%), health services 10% (7%), and population health research 8% (3%). The greatest number of grants was given in 2009, but 2003 saw the greatest amount. Funding is clustered in a handful of provinces and institutions, favouring biomedical research and disfavouring behavioural interventions, adaptation, and institutional response. Preference for biomedical research may be due to the detriment of clinical research.


Author(s):  
D.M. Wenner

This chapter discusses the social value requirement in clinical research and its intersection with health research priority-setting. The social value requirement states that clinical research involving human subjects is only ethical if it has the potential to produce socially valuable knowledge. The chapter discusses various ways to specify both the justification for and the content of the social value requirement. It goes on to consider the implications of various accounts of the content and justification for the requirement for the ethics of health research priority-setting, showing that while some accounts of the requirement are largely silent with respect to how research questions should be prioritized, others entail robust obligations to prioritize research that might benefit particular groups. The chapter also briefly examines potential arguments for something like a social value requirement in other kinds of research, specifically social scientific research.


2014 ◽  
Vol 39 (3) ◽  
pp. 393-420 ◽  
Author(s):  
Katelin E. Albert

In 2009, Canadian social science research funding underwent a transition. Social science health-research was shifted from the Social Science and Humanities Research Council (SSHRC) to the Canadian Institute of Health Research (CIHR), an agency previously dominated by natural and medical science. This paper examines the role of health-research funding structures in legitimizing and/or delimiting what counts as ‘good’ social science health research. Engaging Gieryn’s (1983) notion of ‘boundary-work’ and interviews with qualitative social science graduate students, it investigates how applicants developed proposals for CIHR. Findings show that despite claiming to be interdisciplinary, the practical mechanisms through which CIHR funding is distributed reinforce rigid boundaries of what counts as legitimate health research. These boundaries are reinforced by applicants who felt pressure to prioritize what they perceived was what funders wanted (accommodating natural-science research culture), resulting in erased, elided, and disguised social science theories and methods common for ‘good social science.’


2020 ◽  
Vol 18 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Seydou Doumbia ◽  
Ydrissa Sow ◽  
Mahamadou Diakite ◽  
Chuen-Yen Lau

Abstract Mali, like the rest of the world, has seen a rapid spread of COVID-19 since the first report of imported cases. Despite being a low-income country, Mali has leveraged scientific research resources via coordinated approaches to enable public health emergency planning and response to the COVID-19 pandemic. Mali’s approach includes the harmonization of research activities; leveraging of research laboratory capacity of the University Clinical Research Center, Mali International Center for Excellence and three other in-country laboratories for community COVID-19 testing; strengthening relationships amongst local and international stakeholders; and collaboration with the Ministry of Health to integrate scientific evidence into public policy and emergency management of COVID-19 through a platform of consultation and open communication. The country has implemented national coordination of its COVID-19 response by establishing a COVID-19 Scientific Advisory Committee and a COVID-19 Technical Coordination Committee, both within the Ministry of Health and working collaboratively with other stakeholders. Members of Mali’s COVID-19 Scientific Advisory Committee also serve as leaders of its principal academic and government clinical and public health research entities. This centralised approach has enabled the prioritisation of COVID-19 control activities, informed allocation of resources, evidence-based public health practices and timely decision-making in the pandemic setting. Though challenges remain, lessons learned from Mali’s harnessing of clinical research capacity to guide and support its COVID-19 response can be applied to future global health research challenges and illustrate the power of building public health-responsive research capacity in resource-limited settings through international collaboration.


2019 ◽  
Vol 9 (2) ◽  
pp. 22-25
Author(s):  
Zoheb Rafique

This article talks about both clinical research ethics and public health research ethics. Clinical research ethics are defined as set of relevant ethics considered necessary for the conduct of clinical trials in field of the clinical research. While public health research ethics is mainly aimed at finding out what is best for the communities and the populations rather than the individuals. Research ethics is mainly focused on the protection of individual participants and some of the research norms and accepted principles may be challenging when applying in some of the research contexts.  


2016 ◽  
Vol 10 (2) ◽  
pp. 145-147 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jessica Whitburn ◽  
Surjeet Singh ◽  
Prasanna Sooriakumaran

Starting and conducting clinical trials in England can be a complicated and time-consuming process. Before your study can begin it is necessary to gain approval from the appropriate regulatory bodies. Prior to March 2016, studies required National Health Service (NHS) permission (also referred to as Research and Development (R&D) approval) obtained via the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Coordinated System for gaining NHS Permission (CSP). Since March 2016, a new streamlined system has been introduced with the aim of making it easier to gain regulatory approvals. Now studies must go through the process of Health Research Authority (HRA) approval. In this article we review the process of gaining HRA approval in England. The article is aimed at junior researchers to help them understand the application process, and to give tips on how to succeed in gaining approval.


2016 ◽  
Vol 7 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Tahera Ahmed Ahmed

Hello readers! Hope everyone is fine especially in this season where we often are prone to attacks of cold or flu. The holiday season is at our threshold, and we wish everyone to be in the best of health and happiness.This issue of the BJB is very interesting with topics stretching from Non Communicable Diseases to the ethical issues related to the habitation of the planet Mars, and proves how forward looking are our readers and authors.Mohammad Rashedul Islam et al discuss the application of the SARA method in a district in Bangladesh. The method is based on the principle of Service Availability and Readiness Assessment of WHO. The study in a district in Bangladesh found that about 62% of all the facilities were ready to provide general services like basic amenities with basic equipment, standard precautions for infection prevention, diagnostic capacity and essential medicines. However in case of Non-Communicable Diseases (NCD), only 40% of the health facilities had chronic respiratory disease and cardiovascular diseases diagnosis/management and only 32% had availability of diabetes diagnosis/management. Therefore, service availability and readiness of the health facilities to provide NCD related health services were not satisfactory. The authors emphasize that SARA which is a tool to monitor facilities to be ready for provision of services including NCD, should be used by all clinic managers.The very scientific and forward looking article titled “SCNT Method and the Application for Patent Eligibility on Cloned Animals” by Norman K. Swazo reviews US federal court decisions regarding applications for patent in the case of live-born animal clones. A decision issued from the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit established an earlier decision of the Patent Trial and Appeal Board that live-born animals cloned by the somatic cell nuclear transfer method (SCNT) like cattle, sheep, pigs, and goats are not patentable, so a scientist using the method is not eligible for a patent claim on the animals. The author feels that this decision has ethical implications related to the moral status of cloned animals. The author argues whether the end product of a SCNT (somatic cell nuclear transfer) application is same as an invention or   only a revelation of nature at the cellular level. The author quotes Article 11 of Universal Declaration on the Human Genome and Human Rights UNDHGR “Practices which are contrary to human dignity, such as reproductive cloning of human beings, shall not be permitted.” He concludes that the judicial assessments in the USA deciding on the question of patenting of animal clones provide important barriers to human reproductive cloning research, safeguarding moral and legal commitment to human dignity.  The article on Ethics in Public Health Research and Clinical Research by Muhammad Waseem Khanet al discusses on the need to continue to focus on ethical values in conducting any research. Tha authors stress the importance, either in public health research or clinical research, of the need to  recognize an ethical standard that respects individual’s autonomy and community’s wellbeing. This can be achieved through collective collaboration for the protection of individual’s autonomy, dignity and wellbeing. Research ethics is a fundamental criterion to be complied with throughout a research study. The very interesting article on Planetary Protection for Mars: Time for Reconsideration by Svetoslav Alexandrov looks into the ethical questions beyond mother earth but which could be affected by people from our planet. In this manuscript the author discusses the ethics of the protection of hypothetical organisms on Mars in terms of planned manned space missions and subsequent colonization. The author discusses the possible problems related to a process called terraformation where the planet is converted to make it suitable for Earth life. He argues that terraformation will change the whole condition of the planet. The author quotes Carl Sagan, of The Planetary Society: “If there is life, then I believe we should do nothing to disturb that life. Mars then, belongs to the Martians, even if they are microbes” . I think we all agree with this brilliant recommendation.The article ‘We Still Need to Improve Our Research Writing Ethics’ by Sheikh Arslan Sehgal looks into the value of maintaining professional integrity of research work. Particularly with issues like plagiarism, ethics, authorship and data fabrication. He argues that the scientific community must obey the scientific ethical norms and rules. He feels that ethical problems must be resolved for the advancement of research in countries including Pakistan. The author recommends teaching students the international, institutional and professional standards regarding research and authorship issue. Thus from the beginning researchers will know the key components of ethics in conducting research and the end product will be research work of quality and acceptability.Dear Readers, we look forward to your articles, commentaries, observations on different issues which touch our lives and will help in broadening our knowledge and understanding of Bioethics.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document