Informed consent form readability standards vs. actual readability: A survey of U.S. medical school institutional review boards

2002 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael K. Paasche-Orlow ◽  
Holly A. Taylor ◽  
Frederick L. Brancati
2003 ◽  
Vol 78 (8) ◽  
pp. 831-836 ◽  
Author(s):  
Eric G. Campbell ◽  
Joel S. Weissman ◽  
Brian Clarridge ◽  
Recai Yucel ◽  
Nancyanne Causino ◽  
...  

2015 ◽  
Vol 23 (4) ◽  
pp. 455-464 ◽  
Author(s):  
Christine Øye ◽  
Nelli Øvre Sørensen ◽  
Stinne Glasdam

Background: The increase in medical ethical regulations and bureaucracy handled by institutional review boards and healthcare institutions puts the researchers using qualitative methods in a challenging position. Method: Based on three different cases from three different research studies, the article explores and discusses research ethical dilemmas. Objectives and ethical considerations: First, and especially, the article addresses the challenges for gatekeepers who influence the informant’s decisions to participate in research. Second, the article addresses the challenges in following research ethical guidelines related to informed consent and doing no harm. Third, the article argues for the importance of having research ethical guidelines and review boards to question and discuss the possible ethical dilemmas that occur in qualitative research. Discussion and conclusion: Research ethics must be understood in qualitative research as relational, situational, and emerging. That is, that focus on ethical issues and dilemmas has to be paid attention on the spot and not only at the desktop.


Author(s):  
Jaap Bos

After Reading This Chapter, You Will: Have a general knowledge of Institutional Review Board (IRB) procedures Have the capacity to anticipate the basic ethical pitfalls in research designs Know how to counter common ethical objections Be able to design an informed consent form


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document