首页> 外文期刊>American journal of public health >'It's like Tuskegee in reverse': a case study of ethical tensions in institutional review board review of community-based participatory research.
【24h】

'It's like Tuskegee in reverse': a case study of ethical tensions in institutional review board review of community-based participatory research.

机译:“就像Tuskegee相反”:以社区参与研究为基础的机构审查委员会审查中的伦理紧张局势的案例研究。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

Community-based participatory research (CBPR) addresses the social justice dimensions of health disparities by engaging marginalized communities, building capacity for action, and encouraging more egalitarian relationships between researchers and communities. CBPR may challenge institutionalized academic practices and the understandings that inform institutional review board deliberations and, indirectly, prioritize particular kinds of research. We present our attempt to study, as part of a CBPR partnership, cigarette sales practices in an inner-city community. We use critical and communitarian perspectives to examine the implications of the refusal of the university institutional review board (in this case, the University of California, San Francisco) to approve the study. CBPR requires expanding ethical discourse beyond the procedural, principle-based approaches common in biomedical research settings. The current ethics culture of academia may sometimes serve to protect institutional power at the expense of community empowerment.
机译:基于社区的参与性研究(CBPR)通过让边缘化社区参与,建设行动能力并鼓励研究人员与社区之间建立更平等的关系来解决健康差异的社会正义问题。 CBPR可能会挑战制度化的学术惯例以及为制度审查委员会的审议提供信息的理解,并间接地对特定类型的研究进行优先排序。作为CBPR合作伙伴关系的一部分,我们介绍了我们在市中心社区研究卷烟销售实践的尝试。我们使用批判和社群主义的观点来研究拒绝大学机构审查委员会(在本例中为加利福尼亚大学旧金山分校)批准研究的含义。 CBPR要求将道德论述扩展到生物医学研究环境中常见的基于程序的,基于原则的方法之外。当前学术界的道德文化有时可能以牺牲社区权力为代价来保护机构权力。

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