Ethics Review (ethics + review)

Distribution by Scientific Domains


Selected Abstracts


Is Research-Ethics Review a Moral Panic?,

CANADIAN REVIEW OF SOCIOLOGY/REVUE CANADIENNE DE SOCIOLOGIE, Issue 1 2001
Will C. van den HoonaardArticle first published online: 14 JUL 200
Au cours des dix dernières années, nous avons été témoins de l'im-portance croissante accordée aux principes d'éthique appliqués à la recherche mais aussi de la popularité et de la pertinence grandis-santes de la recherche inductive, plus connue sous le nom de recherche et d'analyse qualitatives. Dans cet article, nous étudions le contexte social dans lequel se situe l'examen déontologique des travaux de recherche et son influence sur la recherche qualitative. Plus précisément, nous soutenons que, lorsque cet examen déontologique est fondé sur les principes et l'épistémologie de la recherche déductive, il a tendance à rogner et à entraver le dynamisme et l'ob-jet de la recherche qualitative. À l'aide de documents, de rapports de recherche formelle et d'après notre expérience personnelle et celle d'autres collègues, nous démontrons l'aspect disproportioné de l'examen déontologique de la recherche, qui semble favoriser la recherche quantitative - c'est-à-dire la recherche formelle fondée sur des hypothèses -, au détriment de la recherche qualitative. Nos exem-ples proviennent surtout du Canada, des États-Unis et d'Angleterre, en anthropologie, éducation, sciences infirmières, psychologie et so-ciologie. Nous affirmons que les processus sociaux qui sous-tendent l'analyse déontologique de la recherche s'apparentent à ceux que lon associe à une panique morale. The recent decade saw not only the rise of the importance of formal ethical research guidelines, but also witnessed the growing popularity and relevance of inductive research, better known as qualitative research and analysis. This paper addresses the social context of formal ethical review and its influence on qualitative research. Specifically, it suggests that when ethical review is based on the principles and epistemology of deductive research, it tends to erode or hamper the thrust and purpose of qualitative research. Using documents, formal research accounts, and the experiences of others and myself, the author indicates the lopsided nature of reviewing the ethics of research, which seems to work in favour of quantitative, formal hypotheses-driven research, to the serious disadvantage of qualitative research. The paper draws most heavily on evidence in Canada, the United States, and England, in the fields of anthropology, education, nursing, psychology, and sociology. The social processes underpinning research-ethics review, the author avers, are similar to those associated with a moral panic. [source]


Institutional Review Boards and Multisite Studies in Health Services Research: Is There a Better Way?

HEALTH SERVICES RESEARCH, Issue 1 2005
Jennifer L. Gold
Objective. The following paper examines the issue of whether the current system for ethics review of multisite health services research protocols is adequate, or whether there exist alternative methods that should be considered. Principal Findings. (1) Investigators at different sites in a multisite project often have very different experiences with respect to the requirements and requests of the review board. Other problems include the waste of time and resources spent on document preparation for review boards, and delays in the commencement of research activities. (2) There are several possible reasons why there is variability in ethics review. These include the absence of standardized forms, differences in the background and experiences of board members, the influence of institutional or professional culture, and regional thinking. (3) Given the limited benefits derived from the variability in recommendations of multiple boards and the numerous problems encountered in seeking ethics approval from multiple boards suggest that some sort of reform is in order. Conclusions. The increasing number of multisite, health services research studies calls for a centralized system of ethics review. The local review model is simply not conducive to multisite studies, and jeopardizes the integrity of the research process. Centralized multisite review boards, together with standardized documents and procedure, electronic access to documentation, and training for board members are all possible solutions. Changes to the current system are necessary not only to facilitate the conduct of multisite research, but also to preserve the integrity of the ethics approval process in general. [source]


Evidence pyramids, rigour and ethics review of public health research

AUSTRALIAN AND NEW ZEALAND JOURNAL OF PUBLIC HEALTH, Issue 3 2009
Priscilla Robinson
No abstract is available for this article. [source]


Is Research-Ethics Review a Moral Panic?,

CANADIAN REVIEW OF SOCIOLOGY/REVUE CANADIENNE DE SOCIOLOGIE, Issue 1 2001
Will C. van den HoonaardArticle first published online: 14 JUL 200
Au cours des dix dernières années, nous avons été témoins de l'im-portance croissante accordée aux principes d'éthique appliqués à la recherche mais aussi de la popularité et de la pertinence grandis-santes de la recherche inductive, plus connue sous le nom de recherche et d'analyse qualitatives. Dans cet article, nous étudions le contexte social dans lequel se situe l'examen déontologique des travaux de recherche et son influence sur la recherche qualitative. Plus précisément, nous soutenons que, lorsque cet examen déontologique est fondé sur les principes et l'épistémologie de la recherche déductive, il a tendance à rogner et à entraver le dynamisme et l'ob-jet de la recherche qualitative. À l'aide de documents, de rapports de recherche formelle et d'après notre expérience personnelle et celle d'autres collègues, nous démontrons l'aspect disproportioné de l'examen déontologique de la recherche, qui semble favoriser la recherche quantitative - c'est-à-dire la recherche formelle fondée sur des hypothèses -, au détriment de la recherche qualitative. Nos exem-ples proviennent surtout du Canada, des États-Unis et d'Angleterre, en anthropologie, éducation, sciences infirmières, psychologie et so-ciologie. Nous affirmons que les processus sociaux qui sous-tendent l'analyse déontologique de la recherche s'apparentent à ceux que lon associe à une panique morale. The recent decade saw not only the rise of the importance of formal ethical research guidelines, but also witnessed the growing popularity and relevance of inductive research, better known as qualitative research and analysis. This paper addresses the social context of formal ethical review and its influence on qualitative research. Specifically, it suggests that when ethical review is based on the principles and epistemology of deductive research, it tends to erode or hamper the thrust and purpose of qualitative research. Using documents, formal research accounts, and the experiences of others and myself, the author indicates the lopsided nature of reviewing the ethics of research, which seems to work in favour of quantitative, formal hypotheses-driven research, to the serious disadvantage of qualitative research. The paper draws most heavily on evidence in Canada, the United States, and England, in the fields of anthropology, education, nursing, psychology, and sociology. The social processes underpinning research-ethics review, the author avers, are similar to those associated with a moral panic. [source]