Cargando…

Ethics issues identified by applicants and ethics experts in Horizon 2020 grant proposals

Background: We assessed the ethics review of proposals selected for funding under the Marie Skłodowska-Curie Actions (MSCA) and the European Research Council (ERC) in Horizon 2020, EU’s framework programme for research and innovation, 2014-2020. Methods: We analysed anonymized datasets for 3,054 MSC...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Buljan, Ivan, Pina, David G, Marušić, Ana
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: F1000 Research Limited 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8356263/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34394917
http://dx.doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.52965.2
_version_ 1783736910890401792
author Buljan, Ivan
Pina, David G
Marušić, Ana
author_facet Buljan, Ivan
Pina, David G
Marušić, Ana
author_sort Buljan, Ivan
collection PubMed
description Background: We assessed the ethics review of proposals selected for funding under the Marie Skłodowska-Curie Actions (MSCA) and the European Research Council (ERC) in Horizon 2020, EU’s framework programme for research and innovation, 2014-2020. Methods: We analysed anonymized datasets for 3,054 MSCA individual fellowships (IF), 417 MSCA Innovative Training Networks (ITN), and 1,465 ERC main-listed proposals with ethics conditional clearance, over four years (2016 to 2019). The datasets included the information on ethics issues identified by applicants in their proposal and ethics issues and requirements identified by ethics experts during the ethics review. Results: 42% of proposals received ethical clearance. For proposals with conditional ethics clearance (n=3546), most of the identified ethics issues by both applicants and ethics experts were in the ethics categories related to humans; protection of personal data; environment, health and safety; and non-EU countries. Ethics experts identified twice as many ethics issues compared to applicants across funding schemes, years, and from high- and low-research performing countries. ERC grants had the highest number of ethics requirements per proposal (median (Md)=8, interquartile range (IQR=4-14), compared to ITN (Md=6, IQR=3-13) and IF grants (Md=3, IQR=2-6). The majority of requirements had to be fulfilled after grant agreement: 99.4% for IF, 99.5% for ITN, and 26.0% for ERC. For 9% of the proposals, the requirements included the appointment of an independent ethics advisor and 1% of the proposals had to appoint an ethics advisory board. Conclusions: Many applicants for highly competitive H2020 funding schemes lack awareness of ethics issues raised by their proposed research. There is a need for better training of researchers at all career stages about ethics issues in research, more support to researchers from research organizations to follow the funding agencies requirements, as well as further development and harmonization of the ethics appraisal process during grant assessment.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8356263
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher F1000 Research Limited
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-83562632021-08-12 Ethics issues identified by applicants and ethics experts in Horizon 2020 grant proposals Buljan, Ivan Pina, David G Marušić, Ana F1000Res Research Article Background: We assessed the ethics review of proposals selected for funding under the Marie Skłodowska-Curie Actions (MSCA) and the European Research Council (ERC) in Horizon 2020, EU’s framework programme for research and innovation, 2014-2020. Methods: We analysed anonymized datasets for 3,054 MSCA individual fellowships (IF), 417 MSCA Innovative Training Networks (ITN), and 1,465 ERC main-listed proposals with ethics conditional clearance, over four years (2016 to 2019). The datasets included the information on ethics issues identified by applicants in their proposal and ethics issues and requirements identified by ethics experts during the ethics review. Results: 42% of proposals received ethical clearance. For proposals with conditional ethics clearance (n=3546), most of the identified ethics issues by both applicants and ethics experts were in the ethics categories related to humans; protection of personal data; environment, health and safety; and non-EU countries. Ethics experts identified twice as many ethics issues compared to applicants across funding schemes, years, and from high- and low-research performing countries. ERC grants had the highest number of ethics requirements per proposal (median (Md)=8, interquartile range (IQR=4-14), compared to ITN (Md=6, IQR=3-13) and IF grants (Md=3, IQR=2-6). The majority of requirements had to be fulfilled after grant agreement: 99.4% for IF, 99.5% for ITN, and 26.0% for ERC. For 9% of the proposals, the requirements included the appointment of an independent ethics advisor and 1% of the proposals had to appoint an ethics advisory board. Conclusions: Many applicants for highly competitive H2020 funding schemes lack awareness of ethics issues raised by their proposed research. There is a need for better training of researchers at all career stages about ethics issues in research, more support to researchers from research organizations to follow the funding agencies requirements, as well as further development and harmonization of the ethics appraisal process during grant assessment. F1000 Research Limited 2021-09-06 /pmc/articles/PMC8356263/ /pubmed/34394917 http://dx.doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.52965.2 Text en Copyright: © 2021 Buljan I et al. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Licence, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Research Article
Buljan, Ivan
Pina, David G
Marušić, Ana
Ethics issues identified by applicants and ethics experts in Horizon 2020 grant proposals
title Ethics issues identified by applicants and ethics experts in Horizon 2020 grant proposals
title_full Ethics issues identified by applicants and ethics experts in Horizon 2020 grant proposals
title_fullStr Ethics issues identified by applicants and ethics experts in Horizon 2020 grant proposals
title_full_unstemmed Ethics issues identified by applicants and ethics experts in Horizon 2020 grant proposals
title_short Ethics issues identified by applicants and ethics experts in Horizon 2020 grant proposals
title_sort ethics issues identified by applicants and ethics experts in horizon 2020 grant proposals
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8356263/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34394917
http://dx.doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.52965.2
work_keys_str_mv AT buljanivan ethicsissuesidentifiedbyapplicantsandethicsexpertsinhorizon2020grantproposals
AT pinadavidg ethicsissuesidentifiedbyapplicantsandethicsexpertsinhorizon2020grantproposals
AT marusicana ethicsissuesidentifiedbyapplicantsandethicsexpertsinhorizon2020grantproposals