Research Ethics Matthew Billington

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Reconciling the sharing of research data with ethical review for research with people as participants Dr Veerle Van den Eynden UK Data Archive Data support.
Advertisements

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.
The School Research Ethics Committee Welsh School of Architecture.
University Research Ethics Committee Workshop on procedure and data protection issues 30th May 2008.
Chapter 10 Ethical Issues in Nursing Research. Perspectives for Assessing Ethical Acceptability Utilitarian Perspective - the good of a project is defined.
Ethics in Field Research Philip Verwimp 27 February, 2014.
Tri-Council Policy Statement 2010 Ethical Conduct for Research Involving Humans.
Fundamentals of IRB Review. Regulatory Role of the IRB Authority to approve, require modifications in (to secure approval), or disapprove all research.
Research Ethics The American Psychological Association Guidelines
Evaluating Risk 1 IRB CELT Presentation Colleen Donaldson – IRB Administrator Julie Wilkens – IRB Coordinator.
Obtaining Informed Consent: 1. Elements Of Informed Consent 2. Essential Information For Prospective Participants 3. Obligation for investigators.
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.
8 Criteria for IRB Approval of Research 45 CFR (a)
بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم. THE TITLE “INTRODUCTION”
Ethics in Research Stangor Chapter 3.
PROF. CHRISTINE MILLIGAN SCHOOL OF HEALTH AND MEDICINE LANCASTER UNIVERSITY Ethics and Ethical Practice in Research.
E THICS IN P SYCHOLOGY Ethics Committee Role of the Researcher Participant’s Rights.
Principles of medical ethics Lecture (4) Dr. rawhia Dogham.
Workshop on Health Examination Surveys (HES) Legal and ethical issues Susanna Conti, M. Kanieff, G. Rago Istituto Superiore di Sanità (ISS) (National Public.
Introducing Research Ethics: Policy and Procedure
“What’s Ethics Got To Do With It” Presentation to the Canberra Evaluation Forum Gary Kent Head Governance Australian Institute of Health and Welfare.
The Global Health Network Marijke Geldenhuys 19 September 2014 Adhering to the GCP Principles.. what does that even mean?
RESPONSIBLE CONDUCT IN HUMAN SUBJECTS RESEARCH MARGARITA M. CARDONA DIRECTOR OF SPONSORED RESEARCH Institutional Review Board.
Privacy and Confidentiality. Definitions n Privacy - having control over the extent, timing, and circumstances of sharing oneself (physically, behaviorally,
The Institutional Review Board: A Community College Toolkit Dr. Geri J Anderson.
IRB BASICS: Issues in Ethics and Human Subject Protections Prepared by Ed Merrill Department of Psychology November 12, 2009.
Human Subjects Protections Research Ethics. Basic Assumptions about How Research Should be Conducted Subjects should be protected from harm. Subjects.
SHMD /2/2012 Fitness Code of Ethics 1. ETHICS? 2.
Lecture 2 Jo Mustone Ethics in Psychological Research.
NAVIGATING THE IRB PROCESS University Institutional Review Board California State University, Stanislaus.
Experimental Research Methods in Language Learning Chapter 6 Ethical Considerations in Experimental Research.
APPROVAL CRITERIA AN IRB INFOSHORT MAY CFR CRITERIA FOR IRB APPROVAL OF RESEARCH In order for an IRB to approve a research study, all.
WELCOME to the TULANE UNIVERSITY HUMAN RESEARCH PROTECTION OFFICE WORKSHOP for SOCIAL/BEHAVIORAL RESEARCH (March 2, 2010) Tulane University HRPO Uptown.
Chapter 5 Ethical Concerns in Research. Historical Perspective on Ethics Nazi Experimentation in WWII –“medical experiments” –Nuremberg War Crime Trials.
 What is an IRB and why do we need one at Western?  Who needs to submit proposals to the IRB?  If approved, how long is your proposal good for?  Is.
Principles of medical ethics Lecture (4) Dr. HANA OMER.
Research ethics.
The research ethics review process Hazel Abbott, Chair University Research Ethics Committee.
Protection of Personal Information Act An Analysis on the impact.
Research Ethics Dr Nichola Seare Aston Health Research & Innovation Cluster.
Ethical consideration in research Before you move any further look at the ethics ……!
Ethical Issues in Psychological Research
Chapter 3: Ethical guidelines for psychological research.
Kids' legal rights in medical care, your obligations and risk minimisation 27 April 2017.
Chapter 6 Negotiating access and research ethics
Ethics in Social Psychology
University of Central Florida Office of Research & Commercialization
© 2010 Jones and Bartlett Publishers, LLC
© 2010 Jones and Bartlett Publishers, LLC
Hannah Butler Access Psychology Hannah Butler
Good Clinical Practice
Jeffrey M. Cohen, Ph.D. CIP President HRP Associates, Inc.
Tri-Council Policy Statement 2010
University of Central Florida Office of Research & Commercialization
ETHICAL CONSIDERATIONS IN THE CONDUCT OF HEALTH SCIENCES RESEARCH
Research Methods Assignment 2
Chapter 6 Negotiating access and research ethics
Research Ethics and Integrity Officer
ETHICAL GUIDELINES AND SOCIAL RESEARCH.
Introduction to safe guarding in psychology
Obj. 2.2 Discuss considerations involved before, during and after an interview To view this presentation, first, turn up your volume and second, launch.
Ethics lecture To publish research in psychology must first be approved be a board or committee at the institution you are working at. Institutional Review.
How we use Your Health Records
ETHICAL ASPECTS OF HEALTH RESEARCH
The Need for Ethical Principles
Fitness Code of Ethics SHMD /2/2013.
Chapter 6 Negotiating access and research ethics
RESEARCH METHODS Lecture 14
RESEARCH METHODS Lecture 14
Presentation transcript:

Research Ethics Matthew Billington 0151 794 8290 ethics@Liverpool.ac.uk www.liverpool.ac.uk/intranet/research-support-office/research-ethics/

Research Ethics? Research Ethics is a world-wide set of principles governing the way any research involving interaction between the researcher and other humans or human tissue or data relating to humans, is designed, managed and conducted. In preparing a research project, the dignity, rights, safety and well-being of human participants must at all times be considered, respected and safeguarded. Research Ethics The application of moral rules and professional codes of conduct to the collection, analysis, reporting, and publication of information about research subjects, in particular active acceptance of subjects' right to privacy, confidentiality, and informed consent.  

Research Ethics at University of Liverpool ALL research involving human participants, animals, their tissues or data (which, in addition to experimental and quantitative data, can include qualitative (descriptive) data, transcripts of interviews, etc.) MUST have ethical approval from a University of Liverpool-recognised research ethics committee. Research must not start prior to ethical approval being obtained. Retrospective approval cannot be given. Why Respecting the rights and dignity of human participants Legal frameworks and policies e.g. Data Protection Act, consent; Practicalities of reducing risk Protection Funders Creates better research Research that results in benefits and has minimal risk of harm is research that has been carried out in an ethical manner.

Research Ethics at University of Liverpool Research ethics approval is not required for: Research which does not involve human participants, their data/tissues (literature analysis). Secondary analysis of non-identifiable information. Secondary analysis of information freely available in the public domain.

Consent Consent is the central act in research ethics, in accordance with the University’s key principles, researchers should ensure that every person from whom data is collected for the purpose of research, consents freely to the process on the basis of adequate information. Participants should also be made aware that they are free to withdraw or modify their consent at any point of the research taking place. Research staff and participants must be informed fully about the purpose, methods and intended possible uses of the research, what their participation in the research entails and what risks, if any, are involved. Step 1: The giving of information Step 2: The discussion, clarification and review of the information Step 3: Obtaining the person's written and/or verbal consent

Confidentiality The confidentiality of information supplied by research participants and the anonymity of respondents must be respected. When one person discloses personal information to another believing that it will be held in confidence, a duty of confidence and trust is created. 'The appropriate use and protection of patient data are also paramount. All those involved in research must be aware of their legal and ethical duties. Particular attention must be given to systems for ensuring confidentiality of personal information and to the security of those systems'. Providing anonymity wherever possible Safe storage of the data Restricting access to the research team

Risk Research proposals should be considered in the context of the risks of the project, this can be defined as the potential physical or psychological harm or stress to the participant or the researcher.  When considering a research project the benefits needs to be maximised and the risks minimised. Risks and benefits should be explained to participant as part of the informed consent process.   Psychological Harm Physical Harm Legal Harm Social and Economic Harm How to minimise risk Researchers can minimise the risk of a study by implementing research that includes a well informed protocol, assemble a research team with sufficient expertise, incorporate adequate safeguards, ensure participants autonomy is maximised and ensure the benefits are maximised. A well documented risk assessment should establish that the risks of your research are minimised.

Example Application Staff Project from the Institute of Psychology, Health and Society, which came to full committee review last year. Flagged to central full committee- interview/sensitive

Research Aims and Designs The research involved investigating drinking behaviours following periods of absence from drinking (e.g. Dry January) The researchers proposed to provide participants with a breathalyser and a smartphone app in order to record drinking behaviours. A questionnaire would then be administered to review the participant’s perspectives against the data from the app.

Informed Consent The committee requested further information on how the consent process would look for the questionnaire element The committee recommended that a welcome page was added to the questionnaire which provided information on the study; and contained a consent box through which the participants could tick in order to access the rest of the questionnaire

Confidentiality The researchers originally proposed to make photocopies of participant's ID’s/ passports for verification purposes as part of the breathalyser element of the study. The committee felt that this was unnecessarily collecting identifiable data which could later compromise confidentiality and anonymity. The researchers modified the research design to take a digital photograph of each participant.

Data Management The committee were concerned regarding the proposal to send breathalyser data to the USA from participant’s mobile phones. The researchers made modifications to the proposals so that all participants were loaned a mobile phone with the app downloaded, meaning no identifiable information was being transmitted.

Risk The Committee recommended that as the study had the potential to cause distress to participants, a debrief sheet should be produced to provide further guidance and support resources to participants. The committee also suggested that the researchers prepare a procedure for managing participant distress. The researchers were asked to provide a lone worker risk assessment to cover the interviews which involved the researchers working alone with participants.