Category / Research Ethics

HRA Approval for NHS Research

HRA Approval is the new process for the NHS in England that simplifies the approvals process for research, making it easier for research studies to be set up. It replaces the need for local checks of legal compliance and related matters by each participating organisation in England. This allows participating organisations to focus their resources on assessing, arranging and confirming their capacity and capability to deliver the study.

Laura Purandare, Research Monitor RBCH, has kindly agreed to run a seminar on 4th May at 2pm in BG14 to explain the changes.

The session will cover:

  • What HRA approval is
  • The implementation of changes
  • The difference it proposes to make to health research in England
  • What it means for our researchers
  • Key resources

The session will last approximately an hour, and Laura will be available for questions following the session. We hope to see you there.

Seminar, Prof Edwin van Teijlingen, ‘Maternal Mortality in Nepal’, Wed 20th April, Royal London House, R303, 13:00-13:50.

Maternal Mortality in Nepal
Abstract: The session links various social and political factors that affect maternal mortality. Women dying in pregnancy and childbirth is very much a problem of and in low-income countries. This talk focuses on Nepal, one of the poorer countries of the world, to highlight a range of maternal health issues and wider influencing factors including globalisation and the influence of global organisations such as the World Health Organisation.

For further information regarding the Social Science seminar series, get in touch with Dr Mastoureh Fathi (mfathi@boutnemouth.ac.uk).

HRA Approval for NHS Research

HRA Approval is the new process for the NHS in England that simplifies the approvals process for research, making it easier for research studies to be set up. It replaces the need for local checks of legal compliance and related matters by each participating organisation in England. This allows participating organisations to focus their resources on assessing, arranging and confirming their capacity and capability to deliver the study.

Laura Purandare, Research Monitor RBCH, has kindly agreed to run a seminar on 4th May at 2pm in BG14 to explain the changes.

The session will cover:

  • What HRA approval is
  • The implementation of changes
  • The difference it proposes to make to health research in England
  • What it means for our researchers
  • Key resources

The session will last approximately an hour, and Laura will be available for questions following the session. We hope to see you there.

Talk by Dr Stephanie Schwandner-Sievers cancelled

Unfortunately we are cancelling the talk: Ethnographies of Memory – the cultural reproduction of militancy in Kosovo by Dr Stephanie Schwandner-Sievers. We apologise for the late notice. This is because the Women Academic Network talk has been rescheduled this morning for the same time slot (see below). Dr Schwandner-Sievers will give her talk at a later date to avoid some people having to make a choice.

Polly Trenow (Fawcett Society)
‘Feminism in practice – does activism really work?’
Wednesday 18th November
TAG22
2-4pm (with networking 3-4pm)

For any questions, please get in touch with Dr Masi Fathi (mfathi@bournemouth.ac.uk)

Open Access publishing does not have to be expensive!

Nepal J Epid Open AccessAs it is Open Access Week I would like to clarify one of the Open Access publishing myths.  One of the common replies I receive from academics colleagues when raising Open Access publishing is that it is (too) expensive. This is, of course, true for many academic journals, but not all are expensive.  Some don’t even charge a processing fee at all.  Infamously, The Lancet Global Health charges an article processing fee of US $4750 upon acceptance of submitted research articles.  More moderately priced scientific journals still charge anything up to about £1,500 per article.

Open-Access-logoAcademic publishing has been big business for decades, and Open Access has rapidly become part of that business.  While traditional book and magazine publishers struggle to stay afloat, research publishing houses have typical profit margins of nearly 40%, according CBCNEWS who quote Vincent Larivière from the University of Montreal’s School of Library & Information Science.

At the same time we see a sharp increase in so-called Predatory Publishers who have set up business for the sole reason to make money from Open Access publishing.  They have not established or taken over academic journal for the greater good of the discipline or the dissemination of research findings to the widest possible audience.  Unscrupulous publishers jump on the Open-Access bandwagon BU librarian Jean Harris recently shared an interesting article about Predatory Publishers (click here to read this!).

J Asian MidwHowever, there are other format of Open Access. One of our more recent papers on research ethics was published in the Nepal Journal of Epidemiology which is an online Open Access journal that does not charge authors for publishing!  Also the Journal of Asian Midwives, where FHSS PhD student Preeti Mahato recently had her article accepted, is hosted in Pakistan by Aga Khan University through its institutional repository eCommons.  Publishing in this Open Access online journal is also free of charge.  In other words, Open Access publishing does not have to be expensive!

 

Prof. Edwin van Teijlingen

CMMPH

 

Congratulations to CMMPH Professor Edwin van Teijlingen on his publication !

Congratulations to CMMPH Professor Edwin van Teijlingen on his latest publication about why researchers do not always seek ethical permission for health research conducted in low income countries. The authors in this paper have identified and explained five possible reasons; a) approval not needed: b) not familiar with the ethics committee: c) applying the wrethicsong committee; d) resource constraints; and e) assumption that non-clinical research are exempted, which are of course overlap and interact each other, for not applying ethical approval in low income countries. They have also provided examples of ethical approval taken from other countries than the host countries and further go on to stress that junior researchers and students should be encouraged to be familiar with research ethical approval. In their paper, they encourage journal editors and peer reviewers to ensure ethical approval beinProfessor Edwin and Professor Padamg granted for manuscripts based on empirical studies. This paper was co-authored by BU visiting faculty Professor Padam Simkhada and recently published in  Nepal Journal of Epidemiology. The paper is freely available through the journal’s website http://nepjol.info/index.php/NJE/issue/view/919

Reference:

van Teijlingen E, Simkhada P. Failure to apply for ethical approval for health studies in low-income countries. Nepal J Epidemiol. 2015;5(3); 511-515

 

Pramod R Regmi, PhD

Post Doctoral Research Fellow, Faculty of Health and Social Science

Concordat on Open Research Data

open dataAs mentioned by Emily in her August HE Policy post, a draft concordat has been published which seeks to make research data in the UK more openly accessible for use.

The concordat has been drafted under the auspices of the UK Open Research Data Forum [Note 1] by a multi-stakeholder working group, which includes HEFCE, Research Councils UK (RCUK), Jisc, the Wellcome Trust and Universities UK.  It aims to help ensure that the research data gathered and generated by members of the UK research community is made openly available for use by others wherever possible, in a manner consistent with relevant legal, ethical and regulatory frameworks and norms.

The concordat aims to establish a set of expectations of good practice, with the intention of making open research data the standard for publicly funded research over the long term.  It recognises the different responsibilities of researchers, their employers and the funders of research, although the intention is not to mandate, codify or require specific activities.

The full draft concordat can be found here – http://www.rcuk.ac.uk/research/opendata/

Key principals are outlined below:

Definition of Research Data used:

“Research Data are quantitative information or qualitative statements collected by researchers in the course of their work by experimentation, observation, interview or other methods. Data may be raw or primary (e.g. direct from measurement or collection) or derived from primary data for subsequent analysis or interpretation (e.g. cleaned up or as an extract from a larger data set). The purpose of open research data is to provide the information necessary to support or validate a research project’s observations, findings or outputs. Data may include, for example, statistics, collections of digital images, sound recordings, transcripts of interviews, survey data and fieldwork observations with appropriate annotations.”

Principle #1

Open access to research data is an enabler of high quality research, a facilitator of innovation and safeguards good research practice.

Principle #2

Good data management is fundamental to all stages of the research process and should be established at the outset.

Principle #3

Data must be curated so that they are accessible, discoverable and useable.

Principle #4

Open access to research data carries a significant cost, which should be respected by all parties.

Principle #5

There are sound reasons why the openness of research data may need to be restricted but any restrictions must be justified and justifiable.

Principle #6

The right of the creators of research data to reasonable first use is recognised.

Principle #7

Use of others’ data should always conform to legal, ethical and regulatory frameworks including appropriate acknowledgement.

Principle #8

Data supporting publications should be accessible by the publication date and should be in a citeable form.

Principle #9

Support for the development of appropriate data skills is recognised as a responsibility for all stakeholders.

Principle #10

Regular reviews of progress towards open access to research data should be undertaken.

Research ethics updated forms

ethicsNew academic year, New forms!

New versions of the ethics forms available now, have a look at the research ethics page for the full details, under useful documents.

The new forms are the Participant Info Sheet and the previously titled Consent form, now titled Participant Agreement Form.

Please make sure you start using the new versions from now on, and please do let us know how you find them.

BU Ethics team

The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing

emily Emily Rosenorn-Lanng Research Assistant

FullSizeRender Rebecca Johnson Research Assistant

FullSizeRender[1] Sarah Wincewicz Research Admin Assistant

 

 

 

 

 

 

Financial scamming is costing the UK public approximately £3.5 billion each year. It is a problem which has developed in recent years and has hit the press because of the relationship with charity mugging, or ‘chugging’ (charities coercing people to give money). Although both scamming and ‘chugging’ result in the coercion of money from donors, they differ in approach, perception and legality. Having a charity connection gives ‘chuggers’ a sense of morality, which gives them a sense of legality, allowing them to tug on the heartstrings of consumers and persuade them, sometimes by intimidation, to part with money. Once a donation has been made, and details have been obtained, charities feel they have the right to regularly hound their donors for further contributions, and have recently been discovered to sell their details on to non-charitable organisations.

The Daily Mail’s investigation into the story of former Army Colonel, Mr Rae, highlights the relationship between scamming and ‘chugging’. Charities who acquired Mr Rae’s personal details sold them up to 200 times to other charities and list brokers who then passed them to scammers who deceived £4,000 from him.

a3

To what extent is it a problem?

The following figures, specific to Mr Rae, demonstrate the relationship that ‘chugging’ has with scamming:
a1

The alarming figures demonstrate the impact of this relationship and raise plenty of questions. How valuable is personal information to a charity? Why are charities selling personal information to non-charities? Where are the moral boundaries in this? What part do charities play in the scamming of vulnerable people?

What are we doing about it?

Here at the National Centre for Post Qualifying Social Work and Professional Practice we are working with Trading Standards to tackle scamming and chugging. To do this we are looking into:

  • Early intervention
  • The cost to victims and the knock on effect of being scammed
  • Developing a sophisticated profile for a potential victim, allowing the creation of ethical mailing lists that charities and public bodies could use
  • Reviewing the understanding of the Data Protection Act to make it potentially easier to remove people from databases (mail, telesales and charity approach) for the most vulnerable
  • Developing good practice guides and advice for professionals working in this field and for vulnerable citizens and their families/carers.

We recognise that this will all take time, but there are steps that you can take today. You can help protect the most vulnerable members of society from this sort of exploitation. How? Have that conversation with Mum, Dad, Nan, Grandad, Aunt or an elderly neighbour. Keep an eye out for scam mail and an ear out for scam phone calls. Make them aware they have a choice as to whether to respond or not, or whether to donate or not.

Most of all, make sure they are not lonely. Time and time again, we hear how loneliness is a key factor in chugging and scamming. If we can ensure our friends and family are not so lonely, then we may be able to ensure they are less vulnerable.

Ethical fundraising : Protecting vulnerable adults from aggressive fundraising techniques

Dr Lee-Ann Fenge

Dr Lee-Ann Fenge

There is growing awareness in the government and media of the importance of recognising and responding to the risks posed by financial abuse of vulnerable older people. My last two blogs have focused on financial scams and mass marketing fraud, but it is now becoming recognised that the charity sector are also employing dubious marketing techniques to elicit money from vulnerable individuals.

The marketing techniques and fundraising methods of charities have come under the spotlight since the death of Olive Cooke, 92, in May. Although her family insist that the numerous approaches she received from charities were not to blame for her death, the fact that she received 267 charity letters in one month alone started alarm bells ringing. Some charities working with emotionally upsetting issues (such as animal cruelty) sometimes employ shocking imagery which has been described as psychoactive advertising (Bennett, 2015). These types of marketing approaches seek to evoke a positive emotional response to fundraising, but can be upsetting for those who receive such material through the post.
As a result of governmental concern about the fundraising methods employed by some charities, changes will be
introduced as amendments to the Charities Bill. This new legislation will tighten rules on how fundraisers approach people who are vulnerable, and how vulnerable adults should be protected from high-pressure marketing tactics.

Some charities have already responded to these concerns by suspending operations with call centres which use
high pressure fundraising techniques.It is interesting to note that although the government is seeking to put a brake on aggressive fundraising techniques, this comes at a time when the remit of the Charity Commission to effectively regulate the sector has been reduced due to budget reductions following the UK Treasury’s Comprehensive Spending Review 2014–15. This has resulted in a reduction in the Commission’s regulatory engagement with charities. As part of the government response to concerns about unethical fundraising tactics, Sir Stuart Etherington, Chief Executive of the National Council for Voluntary Organisations (NCVO), will chair an urgent review of fundraising self-regulation.

It is important that the charity sector develop good practice guidance which embraces the responsibility to safeguard vulnerable groups, and put an end to working with companies which use aggressive fundraising techniques.

The National Centre for Post-Qualifying Social Work at BU is currently working collaboratively with the Chartered Trading Standards Institute (CTSI) to develop good practice guides and advice for professionals working with vulnerable citizens and their families/carers about responding to the risks posed by financial scams. We will be hosting an event as part of the ESRC Festival of Social Science on 10th November to explore with the sector how we develop better responses to safeguarding those most at risk of financial exploitation. Details of how to book onto this event will be posted in the near future.

Reference:

Bennett, R. (2015) Individual characteristics and the arousal of mixed emotions: consequences for the effectiveness of charity fundraising advertisements, International Journal of Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Marketing 20: 188–209