1. Dr. Sarah Quinton, UREC Chair, sequinton@brookes.ac.uk
Research Ethics:
Thoughts on the UREC
process & good practice
Nov 2018
Dr. Sarah Quinton, UREC Chair,

2. Outline of session Introduction: University Policy
Help: My role and the UREC Website
Outline of Research Ethics Review Process
Common problems
Top Tips for good practice

3. Research Ethics at Oxford Brookes
All staff & students are required to consider the ethical implications of the research they conduct with human participants OBU research ethics review procedures are designed to monitor the University Code of Practice for research involving human participants (see i.e. to ensure the dignity, rights, safety and well-being of participants are given primary consideration It is a University requirement for staff /research students to follow the research ethics review procedures Ethics review and approval is a two stage process, 1st at Faculty level and then 2nd at University level The first ‘port of call’ should be doctoral supervisors and then the Faculty Research Ethics Officer – listed on the research ethics website

4. University Policy
All research involving human participants requires ethical review and approval before participants are approached to take part
Dignity, rights, safety and well-being of participants are given primary consideration

5. PRINCIPLES OF GOOD RESEARCH ETHICS
FREE FROM COERCION: Participants should be free from coercion of any kind and should not be pressured to participate in a study
Is there an implicit pressure from management for employees to participate in my research? How can this be mitigated?
Are participants my clients? How can I demonstrate that I have separated my research from my work?
Are participants dependent in any other way?

6. PRINCIPLES OF GOOD RESEARCH ETHICS
CONSENT: Where 3rd parties are affected by the research, consent should be obtained. E.g. Schools, some organisations etc.
Am I intending to carry out my research through a company or organisation?
Do I need permission to carry out my research here? Evidence of formal permission needs to be sought and included with the ethics application.

7. PRINCIPLES OF GOOD RESEARCH ETHICS
HONESTY: Honesty should be central to the relationship between researcher, participant and institutional representatives
Is all relevant information given on my participant information sheet?
Could I be accused of deception?
Is the participant information sheet understandable and free from jargon
Is the privacy statement transparent about the use of data?

8. PRINCIPLES OF GOOD RESEARCH ETHICS
CONFIDENTIALITY AND ANONYMITY: Participants’ confidentiality and anonymity should be maintained …
How do I practice my duty of confidentiality?
What measures can I take to protect anonymity? (use of pseudonyms? Codes?)
If anonymity cannot be assured have I informed the participants?

9. PRINCIPLES OF GOOD RESEARCH ETHICS
COLLECTION AND STORAGE OF DATA: The collection and storage of data must be secure
Are my files/computer password protected?
How can security be assured in the ‘field’?
Am I using Google Drive?
Have I consulted the data management/file sharing matrix ?
DISSEMINATION: Researchers have a duty to disseminate their research findings to all appropriate parties
…a summary of findings, available on request, would suffice.

10. THE ROLE OF THE FACULTY/DEPT RESEARCH ETHICS OFFICER (F/DREO)
Give advice on policy, practice and procedures Review ethics application after supervisory team consultation by PhD student, or after draft if a staff project The F/DREO determines whether an application can be submitted to UREC

11. Website www.brookes.ac.uk/res/ethics Includes:
University Research Ethics Code of Practice
Procedure / dates for all Research Ethics Reviews
Application forms ie E2U form
Guidelines / ‘template’ for Participation Information Sheet, Consent Form, Privacy Statement

12. GDPR Act 2018 and implications for researchers
Online questionnaires must now contain an explicit tick box and sentence for opt in – completion of questionnaire no longer implied consent
Privacy statement must be completed and distributed with participant information sheet (states why data is being collected, who is responsible for it and what will happen to it) – template available on ethics website
Consent form has been updated as data should only be stored for future research use in the same subject area – not for general research purposes.

13. The UREC process Meeting with supervisory team
Download and draft E2U form and relevant materials
Send via to F/DREO to review
F/DREO will feedback with verbal/written comments
Amend draft, if necessary resubmit to F/DREO
FREO confirms approval, applicant prints off and SIGNS hard copy and delivers to F/DREO
F/DREO submits hardcopy to UREC administrator 2 weeks prior to committee meeting
UREC meeting, applications discussed, conditional approval given, letters sent by to researchers with conditions within 1 working week

14. UREC and Doctoral study milestones
Ethics approval can not be applied for prior to the appropriate RDC Sub-Committee receiving an application for registration 
The ethics application can be put forward for consideration at the same time as registration
Registration cannot be activated until ethics approval has been granted 
If ethics approval is required at transfer, the UREC application must be submitted prior to/at the same time as transfer submission to the Sub-Committee

15. Supervisory responsibility and RT roles within research ethics context
Doctoral supervisors have ethics responsibility for the research conducted by their students
Postgraduate Research Tutors (RTs) are responsible for managing the programme in their department etc., and should be involved with the supervisors when they receive applications for registration and transfer
Before signing off forms RTs should consult the supervisory team about current situation of ethics applications

16. Common problems
Lack of engagement with and by supervisory team in the ethics process
Poorly drafted and inconsistent applications
Over technical/specialist language
Poor recruitment strategies
Dependent relationships
Data handling considerations

17. Top tips for good practice
Make use of the Research Ethics website
Meet/discuss the ethics drafts in sufficient time
F/DREOs are the second contact point for student queries, supervisors are the first

18. Practical advice
Download current version of E2U form
Do not forget implications from GDPR 2018
Send all documents as word files, clearly labelled with name of applicant, and type of material e.g. consent form.
Allow sufficient time in drafting, submission review and approval BEFORE data collection

19. Questions?
or (48)5694