Professor Andrew Cheetham PVC (Research) 3 July 2008 Provider Number: CRICOS #00917k Ethical Scholarship in Research Ethical Scholarship Forum.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
The Role of the IRB An Institutional Review Board (IRB) is a review committee established to help protect the rights and welfare of human research subjects.
Advertisements

ENTITIES FOR A UN SYSTEM EVALUATION FRAMEWORK 17th MEETING OF SENIOR FELLOWSHIP OFFICERS OF THE UNITED NATIONS SYSTEM AND HOST COUNTRY AGENCIES BY DAVIDE.
Good Medical Practice Evidence to use for Appraisal Good Medical Practice 2006.
Integrity and impartiality
ICS 417: The ethics of ICT 4.2 The Ethics of Information and Communication Technologies (ICT) in Business by Simon Rogerson IMIS Journal May 1998.
RESPONSIBLE AUTHORSHIP Office for Research Protections The Pennsylvania State University Adapted from Scientific Integrity: An Internet-based course in.
Human Research and Ethics Dr Michèle de Courcy Chair, Faculty of Education HEAG University of Melbourne.
Ethics CS-480b Network Security Dick Steflik. ACM Code of Ethics This Code, consisting of 24 imperatives formulated as statements of personal responsibility,
CODE OF ETHICS South Australian Public Sector Public Sector Act, 2009.
Research Ethics The American Psychological Association Guidelines
Behavioral Research Chapter Three Ethical Research.
The Responsible Conduct of Research at UTAS Office of Research Services.
Use of Children as Research Subjects What information should be provided for an FP7 ethical review?
CUMC IRB Investigator Meeting November 9, 2004 Research Use of Stored Data and Tissues.
بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم. THE TITLE “INTRODUCTION”
Ethics in Research Stangor Chapter 3.
Purpose of the Standards
ETHICAL RESEARCH © 2012 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc.
Year 11 R and S Ethics Great Ethical Thinkers. Codes of Ethics in Society.
Research Methods for the Social Sciences: Ethics Ryan J. Martin, Ph.D. Thomas N. Cummings Research Fellow March 9, 2010.
Data Protection Recruitment Process
Putting Professional Ethics into research and practice BASW.
METHODS IN BEHAVIORAL RESEARCH NINTH EDITION PAUL C. COZBY Copyright © 2007 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc.
EFFECTING CULTURAL CHANGE IN RESEARCH ETHICS AND INTEGRITY Encouraging a culture of research integrity Andrew C. Rawnsley.
Ethics and Reflexivity in Educational Research
Human Research Ethics and Obtaining Ethics Approval
Glenn Rivard, Department of Justice 02/XI/22 Research Involving Humans Federal Governance.
Do ethics make a difference? Roger Watson Professor of Nursing University of Hull 12 April 2015.
Code of Conduct University of New England. Employment at the University carries with it an obligation to act in the public interest. All staff members.
Responsible Conduct of Research (RCR) Farida Lada October 16, 2013
Ethics and ethical research
Ethics Jonathan J. Makela Based on material from P. Scott Carney, T. Galvin, J. P. Makela, and the National Ethics Center.
Coding Compliance Plan July 12, Benefits of a compliance program  To demonstrate our commitment to honest and responsible conduct, decrease the.
We have reviewed this material in accordance with U.S. Copyright Law and have tried to maximize your ability to use, share, and adapt it. The citation.
Research Ethics and Research Conduct Karen Moorehead Human Research Ethics Officer Office for Research Photo: Australian HES 11/11/09 Office for Research.
Research Integrity The Australian Code for the Responsible Conduct of Research Dr Peter Wigley Manager, Research Ethics and Integrity Flinders University.
Introducing the University Research Ethics Committee.
Safeguarding Good Scientific Practice in Germany Prof. Ulrike Beisiegel Chair of the DFG Ombudsman DFG Ombudsman Germany Director of the Institute of Molecular.
“What’s Ethics Got To Do With It” Presentation to the Canberra Evaluation Forum Gary Kent Head Governance Australian Institute of Health and Welfare.
Environmental Management System Definitions
IRB BASICS: Issues in Ethics and Human Subject Protections Prepared by Ed Merrill Department of Psychology November 12, 2009.
UC DAVIS OFFICE OF RESEARCH Overview of Good Clinical Practices (GCP) Investigator and Study Team Responsibilities Miles McFann IRB Administration Training.
Ethics in Research: APA code & Review Boards. Definition the study of proper action Morality right versus wrong it is the shared responsibility of the.
Chapter 3 Research in Psychology: An Ethical Enterprise.
Retha Britz Copyright 2013 All rights reserved for this presentation 1 Other important considerations for RECs Retha Britz.
Lecture 2 Jo Mustone Ethics in Psychological Research.
Carole Wells Kutztown University Andrea Chapdelaine Albright College Ana Ruiz Judy Warchal Alvernia University 11 th Annual International Association for.
Authorship, peer review and conflicts of interest.
TUN IRB: The Basics February 26, IRB Function Review human-subject research Ensure the rights & welfare of human subjects are adequately protected.
What Institutional Researchers Should Know about the IRB Susan Thompson Senior Research Analyst Office of Institutional Research Presented at the Texas.
Experimental Research Methods in Language Learning Chapter 6 Ethical Considerations in Experimental Research.
International Atomic Energy Agency Regulatory Review of Safety Cases for Radioactive Waste Disposal Facilities David G Bennett 7 April 2014.
Research Ethics PPAL February, 2011 Part 2.
M6728 Ethics in Research Informed Consent/IRBs Reporting Research Results.
Chapter 5 Ethical Concerns in Research. Historical Perspective on Ethics Nazi Experimentation in WWII –“medical experiments” –Nuremberg War Crime Trials.
8 th November 2007 Research: ethics and research governance Rossana Dowsett Research and Regional Development Division [Pre Award Support] University of.
1 The Nature of Ethics Ethics is generally concerned with rules or guidelines for morals and/or socially approved conduct Ethical standards generally apply.
GCP (GOOD CLINICAL PRACTISE)
Ethical consideration in research Before you move any further look at the ethics ……!
ETHICAL ISSUES IN HEALTH AND NURSING PRACTICE CODE OF ETHICS, STANDARDS OF CONDUCT, PERFORMANCE AND ETHICS FOR NURSES AND MIDWIVES.
PUBLICATION PRINCIPLES for PUBLICATION PROFESSIONALS

Chapter 3: Ethical guidelines for psychological research.
44 Nursing: A Concept-Based Approach to Learning Ethics MODULE
Research Ethics Matthew Billington
Research Integrity & RMIT
The Need for Ethical Principles
CS-480b Network Security Dick Steflik
Presentation transcript:

Professor Andrew Cheetham PVC (Research) 3 July 2008 Provider Number: CRICOS #00917k Ethical Scholarship in Research Ethical Scholarship Forum

July Ethical Scholarship in Research o Responsible Conduct of Research o Ethics of Research using Human Subjects o Ethics of Research using Animal Subjects

Research Code of Conduct o The Australia Code for the Responsible Conduct of Research – ACRCR (2007) Foster and maintain a research environment of intellectual honesty, integrity and scholarly scientific rigor by:  Respecting the truth and rights of those affected by the research  Managing conflicts of interest  Following proper practices of environment, health, safety and security  Promoting adoption of the code and conform to the institutions policies and procedures  Reporting research misconduct July

July UWS Policy – Research Code of Conduct This policy (based around the ACRCR) forms a code of practice for the responsible conduct of research. It aims to:  promote the highest possible standards of research practice;  protect all those associated with the research from any harm that may arise from failures to maintain high standards of research conduct;  discourage misconduct and fraud through encouraging the open presentation and discussion of results via peer review mechanisms;  apply clear procedures for dealing with allegations of misconduct;  protect the rights of all those associated with the research, human and non-human alike

July Plagiarism o Is the practice of claiming or implying original authorship of (or incorporating material from) someone else's written or creative work, in whole or in part, into one's own without adequate acknowledgement. o Correct referencing/acknowledgement is the key Extract from UWS Research Code of Conduct: (15) Good research practice requires researchers to pay attention to obtaining necessary permissions (includes permits, licences), correctly attributing authorship, acknowledging sources, correctly referencing and avoiding plagiarism.

July Responsibility of Researchers in Data Management o Establish retention date and archive strategy in terms of the institutions policy, legislation and to enable sufficient time to allow reference by other interested parties including other researchers. o Data for Publication o Researchers given access to confidential information must maintain that confidentiality and ensure primary materials are kept in secure storage.

July Authorship o Follow policies on authorship and agree on authorship of publication at an early stage in a project. o Include all authors, maintain signed acknowledgements of authorship for all publications. o Do not allow unacceptable inclusions of authorship o Ensure proper and fair acknowledgement of non-authors o Be guided by the Vancouver Protocol.

July Vancouver Protocol Authorship should be based only on substantial contributions to: 1. conception and design, or analysis and interpretation of data; and to 2. drafting the article or revising it critically for important intellectual content; and on 3. final approval of the version to be published. Conditions 1, 2, and 3 must all be met. Participation solely in the acquisition of funding or the collection of data does not justify authorship. General supervision of the research group is not sufficient for authorship. Any part of an article critical to its main conclusions must be the responsibility of at least one author.

July Conflict of Interest o A conflict of interest exists where there is a divergence between the individual interests of a person and their professional responsibilities. o Researchers should:  read and understand the UWS policy on Conflict of Interest,  maintain records of activities that may lead to a conflict and  disclose any conflicts of interest or  if because of confidentiality you cannot disclose details you should declare the conflict and withdraw from the situation.

July Introduction – Human Ethics The federal government endorsed in March 2007 a new National Statement on Ethical Conduct in Human Research which was developed jointly by:  National Health and Medical Research Council  Australian Research Council  Australian Vice-Chancellors’ Committee “The new ethics rules strike a sensible balance between risk and benefit” Australian Higher Education, 18 July

July Overview The ethical conduct of research is a shared responsibility between:  Researchers who conduct and design research  Organisations which employ researchers  Organisations that fund research  Human Research Ethics Committees (HRECs) which review research  the National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC) which publishes guidelines about research

July Principles: o Australia has an ethical review system whereby each research project is reviewed by an HREC. o The HREC must determine if the proposed research adheres to general ethical principles and is hence considered to be ethically acceptable. o The principles are: »Merit and Integrity »Respect for persons »Beneficence, and »Justice.

July Merit and Integrity o Justifiable by its potential benefit, o Designed or developed using appropriate methods o Based on a thorough study of the current literature, as well as previous studies o Designed to ensure that respect for the participants is not compromised o Conducted or supervised by persons or teams with experience, qualifications and competence o Conducted using facilities and resources appropriate for the research.

July Respect: o for human beings is a recognition of their intrinsic value. o requires having due regard for the welfare, beliefs, perceptions, customs and cultural heritage. o of the privacy, confidentiality and cultural sensitivities of the participants. o for human beings involves giving due scope, throughout the research process, to the capacity of human beings to make their own decisions. o respect for those unable to make their own decisions involves empowering them or providing for their protection.

July Beneficence: o The likely benefit of the research must justify any risks of harm or discomfort to participants.  If there are no likely benefits to participants, the risk to participants should be lower.  Where the risks to participants are no longer justified by the potential benefits, the research must be suspended. o The likely benefit may be to the participants, to the wider community, or to both. o Researchers are responsible for:  designing the research to minimise the risks of harm or discomfort to participants;  clarifying for participants the potential benefits and risks of the research; and  the welfare of the participants in the research context.

July Justice o The selection, exclusion and inclusion of categories of research participants is fair, and is accurately described in the results of the research; o The process of recruiting participants is fair; o There is no unfair burden of participation in the research; o There is fair distribution of the benefits of participation; o There is no exploitation of participants; and o There is fair access to the benefits of research.

July Animal Ethics Researchers must comply with: o the Australian Code of Practice for the care and use of animals for scientific purposes  o the NSW Animal Research Act  welfare/research-teaching/factsheets/aw-fact01 welfare/research-teaching/factsheets/aw-fact01 o National Animal Welfare Bill 2003 [2004] o Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act 1985 o Guidelines issued by Gene Technology Regulator.

July Animal Ethics - Continued o Researchers working with native species need approval from the NSW National Parks and Wildlife Service. o All research or teaching exercises involving the use of animals must be approved by the UWS Animal Care and Ethics Committee. o The ACEC is a representative Committee made up of animal researchers, veterinarians, animal welfare representatives and independent members. o For more information

July Animal Care and Ethics Committee o The ACEC has the responsibility to approve proposals (with or without modification) and provide ongoing monitoring of projects and animal holding facilities. o By law the Committee is required to maintain accurate records on the use and disposal of any animals at UWS. o As a general principle the ACEC accepts the use of animals in research and teaching providing there is:  a demonstrated educational or research benefit  no suitable alternatives available at the time eg. video  a minimal number of animals used  a demonstrated effort to minimise the likely impact on the welfare of the animals used.

July Summary: o Compliance with National Guidelines o Compliance with UWS Guirelines and protocols o Peer Review o Benefit Vs Risk o Protection of participants o Protection of researchers o Protection of the Reputation of UWS 20 Ethical considerations of a research project should be considered as an integral part of research planning, not as an additional or separate process.

July Food for Thought Some questions that might help reduce the level of uncertainty are:  How do I personally feel about it?  How would an independent person feel about it?  How does it sit against the values of the University and the spirit of those values?  What guidance do the University's policies and procedures provide?  How would I justify my actions to others?  Is it in the best interests of the University?  How would it look on Page 1 of the Daily Bugle The key is if you are not sure seek guidance!