Cargando…
Current landscape of research ethics consultation services: National survey results
INTRODUCTION: The goal of a research ethics consultation service (RECS) is to assist relevant parties in navigating the ethical issues they encounter in conduct of research. The goal of this survey was to describe the current landscape of research ethics consultation and document if and how it has c...
Autores principales: | , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Cambridge University Press
2022
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9879897/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36756077 http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/cts.2022.470 |
_version_ | 1784878790897303552 |
---|---|
author | Taylor, Holly A. Porter, Kathryn M. Sullivan, Connor McCormick, Jennifer B. |
author_facet | Taylor, Holly A. Porter, Kathryn M. Sullivan, Connor McCormick, Jennifer B. |
author_sort | Taylor, Holly A. |
collection | PubMed |
description | INTRODUCTION: The goal of a research ethics consultation service (RECS) is to assist relevant parties in navigating the ethical issues they encounter in conduct of research. The goal of this survey was to describe the current landscape of research ethics consultation and document if and how it has changed over the last decade. METHODS: The survey instrument was based on the survey previously circulated. We included a number of survey domains from the previous survey with the goal of direct comparison of outcomes. The survey was sent to 57 RECS in the USA and Canada. RESULTS: Forty-nine surveys were completed for an overall response rate of 86%. With the passing of 10 years, the volume of consults received by RECS surveyed has increased. The number of consults received by a subset of RECS remains low. RECS continues to receive requests for consults from a wide range of stakeholders. About a quarter of RECS surveyed actively evaluate their services, primarily through satisfaction surveys routinely shared with requestors. The number of RECS evaluating their services has increased. We identified a group of eight key competencies respondents find as key to providing RECS. CONCLUSIONS: The findings from our survey demonstrate that there have been growth and development of RECS since 2010. Further developing evaluation and competency guidelines will help existing RECS continue to grow and facilitate newly established RECS maturation. Both will allow RECS personnel to better serve their institutions and add value to the research conducted. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-9879897 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2022 |
publisher | Cambridge University Press |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-98798972023-02-07 Current landscape of research ethics consultation services: National survey results Taylor, Holly A. Porter, Kathryn M. Sullivan, Connor McCormick, Jennifer B. J Clin Transl Sci Research Article INTRODUCTION: The goal of a research ethics consultation service (RECS) is to assist relevant parties in navigating the ethical issues they encounter in conduct of research. The goal of this survey was to describe the current landscape of research ethics consultation and document if and how it has changed over the last decade. METHODS: The survey instrument was based on the survey previously circulated. We included a number of survey domains from the previous survey with the goal of direct comparison of outcomes. The survey was sent to 57 RECS in the USA and Canada. RESULTS: Forty-nine surveys were completed for an overall response rate of 86%. With the passing of 10 years, the volume of consults received by RECS surveyed has increased. The number of consults received by a subset of RECS remains low. RECS continues to receive requests for consults from a wide range of stakeholders. About a quarter of RECS surveyed actively evaluate their services, primarily through satisfaction surveys routinely shared with requestors. The number of RECS evaluating their services has increased. We identified a group of eight key competencies respondents find as key to providing RECS. CONCLUSIONS: The findings from our survey demonstrate that there have been growth and development of RECS since 2010. Further developing evaluation and competency guidelines will help existing RECS continue to grow and facilitate newly established RECS maturation. Both will allow RECS personnel to better serve their institutions and add value to the research conducted. Cambridge University Press 2022-11-08 /pmc/articles/PMC9879897/ /pubmed/36756077 http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/cts.2022.470 Text en © The Author(s) 2022 To the extent this is a work of the US Government, it is not subject to copyright protection within the United States. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of The Association for Clinical and Translational Science. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution licence (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted re-use, distribution and reproduction, provided the original article is properly cited. |
spellingShingle | Research Article Taylor, Holly A. Porter, Kathryn M. Sullivan, Connor McCormick, Jennifer B. Current landscape of research ethics consultation services: National survey results |
title | Current landscape of research ethics consultation services: National survey results |
title_full | Current landscape of research ethics consultation services: National survey results |
title_fullStr | Current landscape of research ethics consultation services: National survey results |
title_full_unstemmed | Current landscape of research ethics consultation services: National survey results |
title_short | Current landscape of research ethics consultation services: National survey results |
title_sort | current landscape of research ethics consultation services: national survey results |
topic | Research Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9879897/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36756077 http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/cts.2022.470 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT taylorhollya currentlandscapeofresearchethicsconsultationservicesnationalsurveyresults AT porterkathrynm currentlandscapeofresearchethicsconsultationservicesnationalsurveyresults AT sullivanconnor currentlandscapeofresearchethicsconsultationservicesnationalsurveyresults AT mccormickjenniferb currentlandscapeofresearchethicsconsultationservicesnationalsurveyresults |