...
首页> 外文期刊>HEC forum: an interdisciplinary journal on hospitals’ ethical and legal issues >A Qualitative Study on Experiences and Perspectives of Members of a Dutch Medical Research Ethics Committee
【24h】

A Qualitative Study on Experiences and Perspectives of Members of a Dutch Medical Research Ethics Committee

机译:荷兰医学研究伦理委员会成员经验与观点的定性研究

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
   

获取外文期刊封面封底 >>

       

摘要

The aim of this research was to gain insight into the experiences and perspectives of individual members of a Medical Research Ethics Committee (MREC) regarding their individual roles and possible tensions within and between these roles. We conducted a qualitative interview study among members of a large MREC, supplemented by a focus group meeting. Respondents distinguish five roles: protector, facilitator, educator, advisor and assessor. Central to the role of protector is securing valid informed consent and a proper risk-benefit analysis. The role of facilitator implies that respondents want to think along with and assist researchers in order to help medical science progress. As educators, the respondents want to raise ethical and methodological awareness of researchers. The role of advisor implies that respondents bring in their own expertise. The role of assessor points to contributing to the overall evaluation of the research proposal. Various tensions were identified within and between roles. Within the role of protector, a tension is experienced between paternalism and autonomy. Between the role of protector and facilitator tensions occur when the value of a study is questioned while risks and burdens for the subjects are negligible. Within the role of assessor, a tension is felt between the implicit nature of judgments and the need for more explicit formulations. Awareness of various roles and responsibilities may prevent one-sided views on MREC work, not only by members themselves, but also by researchers. Tensions within and between the roles require reflection by MREC members.
机译:该研究的目的是深入了解医学研究道德委员会(MREC)个人成员的经验和观点,了解这些角色内部和可能的紧张局势。我们在大MREC成员进行了一个定性面试学习,由焦点小组会议补充说。受访者区分五个角色:保护者,促进者,教育家,顾问和评估员。保护者的作用核心是确保有效的知情同意和适当的风险效益分析。促进者的作用意味着受访者希望与研究人员一起思考,以帮助医学科学进步。作为教育者,受访者希望提高研究人员的道德和方法论意识。顾问的作用意味着受访者带来了自己的专业知识。评估员点数的作用导致研究提案的整体评估。在角色内和在角色之间鉴定各种紧张局势。在保护者的作用范围内,在家人主义和自治之间存在张力。当保护者的角色和促进者紧张的角色之间发生质疑时,虽然受试者的风险和负担可以忽略不计。在评估员的作用中,判断的隐性性质和需要更明确的制剂之间的隐性性质。对各种角色和职责的认识可能会阻止MREC工作的片面看法,而不仅仅是由成员本身,而且由研究人员身份。角色之间的紧张局势需要MREC成员的反思。

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