scholarly journals What’s the protocol? Canadian university research ethics boards and variations in implementing Tri-Council policy

2020 ◽  
Vol 50 (1) ◽  
pp. 68-81
Author(s):  
Grace Karram Stephenson ◽  
Glen A. Jones ◽  
Emmanuelle Fick ◽  
Olivier Bégin-Caouette ◽  
Aamir Taiyeb ◽  
...  

This article is concerned with the differences in REB policy and application processes across Canada as they impact multi-jurisdictional, higher education research projects that collect data at universities themselves. Despite the guiding principles of the Tri-Council Policy Statement 2 (TCPS2) there is significant variation among the practices of Research Ethics Boards (REBs) at Canada’s universities, particularly when they respond to requests from researchers outside their own institution. The data for this paper were gathered through a review of research ethics applications at 69 universities across Canada. The findings suggest REBs use a range of different application systems and require different revisions and types of oversight for researchers who are not employed at their institution. This paper recommends further harmonization between REBs across the country and national-level dialogue on TCPS2 interpretations.

2020 ◽  
Vol 50 (1) ◽  
pp. 68-81
Author(s):  
Grace Karram Stephenson ◽  
Glen A. Jones ◽  
Emmanuelle Fick ◽  
Olivier Begin-Caouette ◽  
Aamir Taiyeb ◽  
...  

This article is concerned with the differences in REB policy and application processes across Canada as they impact multi-jurisdictional, higher education research projects that collect data at universities themselves. Despite the guiding principles of the Tri-Council Policy Statement 2 (TCPS2) there is significant variation among the practices of Research Ethics Boards (REBs) at Canada’s universities, particularly when they respond to requests from researchers outside their own institution. The data for this paper were gathered through a review of research ethics applications at 69 universities across Canada. The findings suggest REBs use a range of different application systems and require different revisions and types of oversight for researchers who are not employed at their institution. This paper recommends further harmonization between REBs across the country and national-level dialogue on TCPS2 interpretations.


2016 ◽  
Vol 13 (3-4) ◽  
pp. 139-154 ◽  
Author(s):  
Wendy Petillion ◽  
Sherri Melrose ◽  
Sharon L Moore ◽  
Simon Nuttgens

Graduate students typically first experience research ethics when they submit their masters or doctoral research projects for ethics approval. Research ethics boards in Canada review and grant ethical approval for student research projects and often have to provide additional support to these novice researchers. Previous studies have explored curriculum content, teaching approaches, and the learning environment related to research ethics for graduate students. However, research does not exist that examines students’ actual experience with the research ethics process. Qualitative description was used to explore the research ethics review experience of 11 masters and doctoral students in health discipline programs. Data analysis revealed four themes: curriculum, supervisor support, the ethics application process, and students’ overall experience. The results of this research suggest ideas for enhancing curriculum, deepening students’ relationships with supervisors, and developing the role of research ethics boards to support education for novice researchers. This study contributes to comprehension of the research ethics experience for graduate students and what they value as new researchers.


Author(s):  
Robert J. Anthony ◽  
Larry D. Yore ◽  
Richard K. Coll ◽  
Justin Dillon ◽  
Mei-Hung Chiu ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document