首页> 外文OA文献 >Ethical review from the inside: repertoires of evaluation in Research Ethics Committee meetings
【2h】

Ethical review from the inside: repertoires of evaluation in Research Ethics Committee meetings

机译:内部道德审查:研究道德委员会会议中的评估表

摘要

Evaluating the practice of ethical review by Research Ethics Committees (REC) could help protect the interests of human participants and promote scientific progress. To facilitate such evaluations, we conducted an ethnographic study of how an REC reviews research proposals during its meetings. We observed 13 meetings of a Dutch REC and studied REC documents. We coded this material inductively and categorised these codes in two repertoires of evaluation: a repertoire of rules and a repertoire of production. In the repertoire of rules the REC applies rules, weighs scientific value and burdens to the participants and makes a final judgment on a research proposal in a meeting. In the repertoire of production, REC members check documents and forms and advise researchers on how to improve their proposals and can use informal communication. Based on these findings, we think that evaluations of the practice of ethical review should take into account the fact that RECs can use a repertoire of rules and a repertoire of production to evaluate research proposals. Combining these two repertoires can be a viable option so that the REC gives researchers advice on how to improve their proposals to prevent rejection of valuable research
机译:研究伦理委员会(REC)评估伦理审查的实践可以帮助保护人类参与者的利益并促进科学进步。为了促进此类评估,我们对REC在会议期间如何审查研究建议进行了人种学研究。我们观察了荷兰REC的13次会议,并研究了REC文件。我们用归纳法对这种材料进行了编码,并将这些代码分为两个评估清单:规则清单和生产清单。在规则库中,REC应用规则,权衡参与者的科学价值和负担,并在会议上对研究计划做出最终判断。在产品目录中,REC成员检查文件和表格,并为研究人员提供有关如何改进其提案并可以使用非正式沟通的建议。基于这些发现,我们认为对道德审查实践的评估应考虑到RECs可以使用规则库和生产库来评估研究建议这一事实。将这两个库组合在一起可能是一个可行的选择,以便REC为研究人员提供有关如何改进其建议以防止拒绝有价值的研究的建议

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利

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