Cargando…
Roses and Balances: A Paradigm for Constructive Ethical Review of Health Professions Education Research
Recently, the balance between value and necessity of ethical review of health professions education research has been debated. At present, there are large differences in how ethical review of research proposals for health professions education is organized. We present a framework that describes the...
Autores principales: | , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Dove
2021
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8164877/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34079419 http://dx.doi.org/10.2147/AMEP.S305094 |
_version_ | 1783701209927909376 |
---|---|
author | Schutte, Tim Scheele, Fedde van Luijk, Scheltus |
author_facet | Schutte, Tim Scheele, Fedde van Luijk, Scheltus |
author_sort | Schutte, Tim |
collection | PubMed |
description | Recently, the balance between value and necessity of ethical review of health professions education research has been debated. At present, there are large differences in how ethical review of research proposals for health professions education is organized. We present a framework that describes the organization of ethical review in health professions education research, based on the interpersonal circumplex model, also known as Leary’s Rose. The framework is based on the two main balances in ethical review of health professions education research, being the protectiveness for the subjects and how ethical review is organized and responsibilities are shared. The axis/balance of protectiveness ranges between the extremes “paternalistic protective” to “liberal permissive”. The axis/balance of organization and responsibility ranges between the extremes of “centralized” to “local/decentralized”. This model offers insight in the position of an ethical review board and shows the dynamics of the decisions for ethical approval and the consequences of the different approaches to the organization of ethical review of health professions education research. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-8164877 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2021 |
publisher | Dove |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-81648772021-06-01 Roses and Balances: A Paradigm for Constructive Ethical Review of Health Professions Education Research Schutte, Tim Scheele, Fedde van Luijk, Scheltus Adv Med Educ Pract Perspectives Recently, the balance between value and necessity of ethical review of health professions education research has been debated. At present, there are large differences in how ethical review of research proposals for health professions education is organized. We present a framework that describes the organization of ethical review in health professions education research, based on the interpersonal circumplex model, also known as Leary’s Rose. The framework is based on the two main balances in ethical review of health professions education research, being the protectiveness for the subjects and how ethical review is organized and responsibilities are shared. The axis/balance of protectiveness ranges between the extremes “paternalistic protective” to “liberal permissive”. The axis/balance of organization and responsibility ranges between the extremes of “centralized” to “local/decentralized”. This model offers insight in the position of an ethical review board and shows the dynamics of the decisions for ethical approval and the consequences of the different approaches to the organization of ethical review of health professions education research. Dove 2021-05-25 /pmc/articles/PMC8164877/ /pubmed/34079419 http://dx.doi.org/10.2147/AMEP.S305094 Text en © 2021 Schutte et al. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/This work is published and licensed by Dove Medical Press Limited. The full terms of this license are available at https://www.dovepress.com/terms.php and incorporate the Creative Commons Attribution – Non Commercial (unported, v3.0) License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/) ). By accessing the work you hereby accept the Terms. Non-commercial uses of the work are permitted without any further permission from Dove Medical Press Limited, provided the work is properly attributed. For permission for commercial use of this work, please see paragraphs 4.2 and 5 of our Terms (https://www.dovepress.com/terms.php). |
spellingShingle | Perspectives Schutte, Tim Scheele, Fedde van Luijk, Scheltus Roses and Balances: A Paradigm for Constructive Ethical Review of Health Professions Education Research |
title | Roses and Balances: A Paradigm for Constructive Ethical Review of Health Professions Education Research |
title_full | Roses and Balances: A Paradigm for Constructive Ethical Review of Health Professions Education Research |
title_fullStr | Roses and Balances: A Paradigm for Constructive Ethical Review of Health Professions Education Research |
title_full_unstemmed | Roses and Balances: A Paradigm for Constructive Ethical Review of Health Professions Education Research |
title_short | Roses and Balances: A Paradigm for Constructive Ethical Review of Health Professions Education Research |
title_sort | roses and balances: a paradigm for constructive ethical review of health professions education research |
topic | Perspectives |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8164877/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34079419 http://dx.doi.org/10.2147/AMEP.S305094 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT schuttetim rosesandbalancesaparadigmforconstructiveethicalreviewofhealthprofessionseducationresearch AT scheelefedde rosesandbalancesaparadigmforconstructiveethicalreviewofhealthprofessionseducationresearch AT vanluijkscheltus rosesandbalancesaparadigmforconstructiveethicalreviewofhealthprofessionseducationresearch |