...
首页> 外文期刊>BMC Medical Ethics >A mixed-methods study on perceptions towards use of Rapid Ethical Assessment to improve informed consent processes for health research in a low-income setting
【24h】

A mixed-methods study on perceptions towards use of Rapid Ethical Assessment to improve informed consent processes for health research in a low-income setting

机译:关于对使用快速伦理评估以改善低收入环境下的健康研究的知情同意程序的看法的混合方法研究

获取原文
           

摘要

Background Rapid Ethical Assessment (REA) is a form of rapid ethnographic assessment conducted at the beginning of research project to guide the consent process with the objective of reconciling universal ethical guidance with specific research contexts. The current study is conducted to assess the perceived relevance of introducing REA as a mainstream tool in Ethiopia. Methods Mixed methods research using a sequential explanatory approach was conducted from July to September 2012, including 241 cross-sectional, self-administered and 19 qualitative, in-depth interviews among health researchers and regulators including ethics committee members in Ethiopian health research institutions and universities. Results In their evaluation of the consent process, only 40.2% thought that the consent process and information given were adequately understood by study participants; 84.6% claimed they were not satisfied with the current consent process and 85.5% thought the best interests of study participants were not adequately considered. Commonly mentioned consent-related problems included lack of clarity (48.1%), inadequate information (34%), language barriers (28.2%), cultural differences (27.4%), undue expectations (26.6%) and power imbalances (20.7%). About 95.4% believed that consent should be contextualized to the study setting and 39.4% thought REA would be an appropriate approach to improve the perceived problems. Qualitative findings helped to further explore the gaps identified in the quantitative findings and to map-out concerns related to the current research consent process in Ethiopia. Suggestions included, conducting REA during the pre-test (pilot) phase of studies when applicable. The need for clear guidance for researchers on issues such as when and how to apply the REA tools was stressed. Conclusion The study findings clearly indicated that there are perceived to be correctable gaps in the consent process of medical research in Ethiopia. REA is considered relevant by researchers and stakeholders to address these gaps. Exploring further the feasibility and applicability of REA is recommended.
机译:背景技术快速伦理学评估(REA)是一种快速的人种志评估方法,是在研究项目开始时进行的,目的是指导同意过程,目的是使通用伦理学指导与特定研究环境相协调。进行当前的研究是为了评估将REA引入埃塞俄比亚的主流工具的相关性。方法2012年7月至2012年9月,采用循序渐进的解释方法进行了混合方法研究,包括对241名横断面,自我管理和19次定性,深度访谈的健康研究人员和监管人员,包括埃塞俄比亚健康研究机构和大学的伦理委员会成员。结果在评估同意过程中,只有40.2%的人认为研究参与者充分理解了同意过程和所提供的信息。 84.6%的人称他们对当前的同意程序不满意,而85.5%的人认为未充分考虑研究参与者的最大利益。普遍提到的与同意相关的问题包括:缺乏清晰度(48.1%),信息不足(34%),语言障碍(28.2%),文化差异(27.4%),过高的期望(26.6%)和权力失衡(20.7%)。约95.4%的人认为应将研究背景下的知情同意,而39.4%的人认为REA将是改善感知问题的适当方法。定性研究结果有助于进一步探索定量研究结果中发现的差距,并找出与埃塞俄比亚当前研究同意程序有关的问题。建议包括在适用的预测试(试验)阶段进行REA。强调了对研究人员就何时以及如何使用REA工具等问题提供明确指导的需要。结论研究结果清楚地表明,埃塞俄比亚医学研究的同意过程中存在可纠正的差距。研究人员和利益相关者认为REA具有解决这些差距的作用。建议进一步探讨REA的可行性和适用性。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号