A Randomized Trial of Rapamycin to Increase Longevity and Healthspan in Companion Animals: Navigating the Boundary Between Protections for Animal Research and Human Subjects Research

2018 ◽  
Vol 18 (10) ◽  
pp. 58-59
Author(s):  
Holly A. Taylor ◽  
Christian Morales ◽  
Liza-Marie Johnson ◽  
Benjamin S. Wilfond
Keyword(s):  
Randomized Trial ◽  
Human Subjects ◽  
Companion Animals ◽  
Animal Research ◽  
Human Subjects Research

scholarly journals Engaging Ethicists in Animal Research Policymaking

ILAR Journal ◽  
2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Angela N Hvitved
Keyword(s):  
Professional Ethics ◽  
Research Policy ◽  
Human Subjects ◽  
Animal Research ◽  
Ethical Framework ◽  
Human Subjects Research ◽  
Deliberative Process ◽  
Ethical Considerations ◽  
Key Stakeholders

Abstract The significance of ethical considerations for animal research policy has long been acknowledged, but the role of philosophical ethics in the policymaking process has been less clear. By comparing the ethical framework of animal research policy with that for human subjects research, this article considers how the legacies of these two policy areas influence current policy and suggests that ethicists and ethical scholarship have been underutilized in developing animal research policy. An important aspect of policymaking is gathering and responding to input provided by various stakeholders. Given their expertise in a highly relevant area, ethicists should be considered key stakeholders in animal research policy deliberations. This article explores the role of ethicists and ethical scholarship in influencing animal research policy and suggests that a more robust engagement with the professional ethics community throughout the deliberative process is vital for policymakers to adequately account for ethical considerations.

The Patient in Patient Safety: Contemporary Issues, From COVID-19 to Citizen Science

2021 ◽  
Vol 10 (1) ◽  
pp. 301-303
Author(s):  
Elizabeth Lerner Papautsky ◽  
Richard J. Holden ◽  
Rupa S. Valdez ◽  
Jordan Hill ◽  
Janetta Brown
Keyword(s):  
Social Media ◽  
Patient Safety ◽  
Citizen Science ◽  
Human Subjects ◽  
Lessons Learned ◽  
Human Subjects Research ◽  
Research Strategies ◽  
Face To Face

In the 4th panel on the topic of The Patient in Patient Safety, we highlighted topics of current relevance and facilitated a reflection session. The objective was to highlight the ways in which the COVID-19 pandemic has impacted patient ergonomics research and work, with particular focus on safety. After a topic overview, panelists presented their work on overcoming challenges to human subjects research created by the suspension of face-to-face activities during the COVID-19 pandemic. A facilitated reflection and brainstorming session using Miro followed. We used questions to elicit examples of patient and caregiver roles in safety during the pandemic and research strategies and challenges. These questions were also distributed on social media prior to the event. The panel served as an opportunity to share lessons learned.

scholarly journals Human Subjects Requirements and Economic Education Researchers

2007 ◽  
Vol 51 (2) ◽  
pp. 49-60 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jane S. Lopus ◽  
Paul W. Grimes ◽  
William E. Becker ◽  
Rodney A. Pearson
Keyword(s):  
Human Subjects ◽  
Economic Education ◽  
Opportunity Costs ◽  
Federal Regulations ◽  
Research Projects ◽  
Human Subjects Research ◽  
Web Based ◽  
American Universities ◽  
Net Benefits ◽  
Low Levels

This paper presents the results of a web-based survey of economic educators who were asked about their knowledge and experience with human subjects research and the mandated federal protocols that govern such research at most American universities. The results indicate that while economic education researchers are experienced in conducting human subjects research and are aware of the federal regulations, they are not well informed about key details of the regulations. They are skeptical of the net benefits of the mandated protocols because of the perceived discouraging burdens of the paperwork that rarely result in significant modifications of their research projects. The authors conclude that recent calls for modifications to the federal regulations for classroom-based research projects may be justified given the opportunity costs of adhering to the regulations compared to the relatively low levels of perceived benefits.

Overcoming the Challenges of Experimental Research: Lessons From a Criminal Justice Case Study Involving TASER Exposure

2018 ◽  
Vol 42 (3) ◽  
pp. 358-385 ◽  
Author(s):  
Natalie Todak ◽  
Michael D. White ◽  
Lisa M. Dario ◽  
Andrea R. Borrego
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Justice ◽  
Large Scale ◽  
Human Subjects ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Human Subjects Research ◽  
Case Study Approach ◽  
Study Approach ◽  
Randomized Controlled ◽  
The Impact

Objective: To provide guidance to criminologists for conducting experiments in light of two common discouraging factors: the belief that they are overly time-consuming and the belief that they can compromise the ethical principles of human subjects’ research. Method: A case study approach is used, based on a large-scale randomized controlled trial experiment in which we exposed participants to a 5-s TASER shock, to describe how the authors overcame ethical, methodological, and logistical difficulties. Results: We derive four pieces of advice from our experiences carrying out this experimental trial: (1) know your limitations, (2) employ pilot testing, (3) remain flexible and patient, and (4) “hold the line” to maintain the integrity of the research and the safety of human subjects. Conclusions: Criminologists have an obligation to provide the best possible evidence regarding the impact and consequences of criminal justice practices and programs. Experiments, considered by many to be the gold standard of empirical research methodologies, should be used whenever possible in order to fulfill this obligation.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document