Category / Research Ethics

REMINDER – the Research Ethics e-module will be launched on 1 July!

BU research, Research Ethics

The research ethics e-module training course will be launched on 1 July.

The University Research & Knowledge Exchange Committee (URKEC) recently approved the implementation plan of a mandatory research ethics e-module training course. The research ethics e-module is vital to ensure all academic staff and PGRs at BU are provided with training in research ethics. This will ensure all members of staff who conduct their own research and supervise students are proficient in basic research ethics principles.

In accordance with the recommendations from the BU Research Ethics Review, the University procured two research ethics courses (Ethics 1: Good Research Practice and Ethics 2: Working with Human Subjects). Both courses will be available on myBU.

The first course (Ethics 1: Good Research Practice) covers standard practice and recent changes in universities’ ethics policies related to research that investigates people and their data. This course will be mandatory for all academic staff and PGRs. Successful completion of the course requires a score of 8/10 on the end of course assessment.

  • All academic staff (including all BU employees who supervise students on dissertations, thesis, etc.) will be required to complete the course no later than three months after the release date (1 July 2013) and refresher training will be required every two years thereafter.
  • All new starters will be notified of the requirement to complete the course. They will also be given three months to complete the course.
  • PRGs will be required to complete the course within three months of the start of their first year. This will begin at the start of the 2013/14 academic year. For ease of access, both courses will be available on the Graduate School’s myBU page.

The second course (Ethics 2: Working with Human Subjects) covers the ethics of involving human participants – directly or indirectly – in research projects. This course is recommended for all academic staff and PGRs and is mandatory if the research project involves working with human participants. Successful completion of the course requires a score of 8/10 on the end of course assessment.

Several engagement initiatives with internal support opportunities will be undertaken to ensure maximum participation with the e-module. For example, Fusion Investment Fund (FIF) applicants will be required to successfully complete the e-module. Additionally, internal development schemes (Grants Academy, EU Academics Development Scheme, etc.) will require that all new members complete the e-module. Due to the potential risks if relevant staff and PGRs are not adequately trained in research ethics, several non-compliance measures will be implemented to ensure they have basic knowledge of research ethics principles and best practice. Please visit the Research Ethics page of the blog for more information on the e-module, to include detail on engagement initiatives and non-compliance measures.

Research Ethics: Insights from the Centre for Midwifery, Maternal & Perinatal Health and the Centre for Social Work, Sociology & Social Policy

BU research, PG research, Publishing, Research Ethics, Research Integritiy, Uncategorized

Ethics contributions

Collage of research ethics contributions

Academics based in HSC have experience in a wide-range of research.  In the process of reflecting on all aspects of the research process several members of HSC have published about ethical issues that they have had to address in their own research.    This BU Blog highlights some of these key HCS papers which may help fellow academics and students across the globe address similar ethical questions.  HSC has a history of publishing on research ethics, Professor Emerita Immy Holloway wrote about the researcher who may have a dual role, or even conflicting role, as researcher and health care professional (1).  More recently, several midwifery researchers in the Centre for Midwifery, Maternal & Perinatal Health wrote about the issues facing practitioners doing research in the field where they work, especially concerning the similarities and differences between professional ethics and research ethics (2-3).  Negotiating ethical paths cleaved by competing concerns between protecting research participants and over-managing the ethical process is tricky.

In her book Rainforest Asylum: The enduring legacy of colonial psychiatric care in Malaysia Dr. Ashencaen Crabtree in the Centre for Social Work, Sociology & Social Policy, addresses the problematic issue of gate-keepers in research together with the ethics of critical observation of abuse (potential or actual), as well as the ethics of advocating on behalf of research participants (4).

The fear that the ethical application process in the UK is becoming more and more cumbersome and bureaucratic has been widely recognised as highlighted by Prof. van Teijlingen and colleagues (5-6).

Research ethics review processes are also considered in terms of access to participants regarded as ‘vulnerable’ in a recently published paper by Dr. Ashencaen Crabtree (7) of ethnographers working in health settings who are seeking to understand the context of care and patient/service user experiences.  She concludes that paternalistic control of participation on the grounds of ethical protection of vulnerable people seriously disenfranchises potential participants in preventing them from being able to share their relevant, lived experiences as recipients of service provision.

Prof. van Teijlingen and BU Visiting Fellow Dr. Padam Simkhada highlighted that the social, cultural and economic contexts in which research is conducted often differ between developing and developed countries.  However they stress that researchers need to apply for research ethics approval to the relevant local authority, if national legislation requires one to do so (8).

A new and challenging area of research is the use of discussion boards as a source of research data.  In their paper Dr. Bond and BU colleagues discuss both practical and ethical dilemmas that arise in using such data (9). In earlier research, Prof. Parker of the Centre for Social Work, Sociology & Social Policy, highlighted some of the benefits and dangers of using email and the Internet for research as the potential for electronic media continues its rapid growth (10).

Obtaining informed consent is something that all researchers need to consider. However, in some research situations obtaining consent can be particularly challenging.  Prof. Hundley and colleagues discuss the ethical challenges involved in conducting a cluster randomised controlled trial, where consent needs to be considered at a number of levels (11).  In a second paper issues of consent during pregnancy, where there is the potential for harm to two participants, are considered (12).

In research into the implications of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 for social research, Prof. Parker explored the contested meanings and difficulties associated with informed consent in social research, highlighting some of the challenges raised by an almost unquestioned acceptance of biomedical research ethics in social research and questioning whether potential ‘harm’ is different in this context (13, 14). This research has led to further explorations of the potential for ethical covert research by Prof. Parker and Dr. Ashencaen Crabtree.

 

The way forward

There a plenty of challenges to research ethics in both the health and social care sectors.  Ethical considerations relate to technological developments such conducting research over the Internet or the analysis of tweets.  HSC staff will continue to publish on a range of moral dilemma as well as practical issues related to research ethics.  Moreover, academic from the two centres are planning a Masterclass on research ethics to be held in early 2014.

 

 

References

  1. Holloway, I., Wheeler, S. (1995) Ethical Issues in Qualitative Nursing Research, Nursing Ethics 2: 223-232.   Web address:  http://nej.sagepub.com/content/2/3/223.full.pdf+html
  2. Ryan, K., Brown, B., Wilkins, C., Taylor, A., Arnold, R., Angell, C., van Teijlingen, E. (2011) Which hat am I wearing today? Practicing midwives doing research, Evidence-Based Midwifery 9(1): 4-8.
  3. van Teijlingen, E.R., Cheyne, H.L. (2004) Ethics in midwifery research, RCM Midwives Journal 7 (5): 208-10.
  4. Ashencaen Crabtree, S. (2012) Rainforest Asylum: The enduring legacy of colonial psychiatric care in Malaysia, London: Whiting & Birch.
  5. van Teijlingen, E., Douglas, F., Torrance, N. (2008) Clinical governance and research ethics as barriers to UK low-risk population-based health research? BMC Public Health 8(396)                            Web address: www.biomedcentral.com/content/pdf/1471-2458-8-396.pdf
  6. van Teijlingen, E. (2006) Reply to Robert Dingwall’s Plenary ‘Confronting the Anti-Democrats: The unethical Nature of Ethical Regulation in Social Science, MSo (Medical Sociology online) 1: 59-60  Web address:  www.medicalsociologyonline.org/archives/issue1/pdf/reply_rob.pdf
  7. Ashencaen Crabtree, S. (2013) Research ethics approval processes and the moral enterprise of ethnography. Ethics & Social Welfare. Advance Access: DOI:10.1080/17496535.2012.703683
  8. van Teijlingen E.R., Simkhada, P.P. (2012) Ethical approval in developing countries is not optional, Journal of Medical Ethics 38 :428-430.
  9. Bond, C.S,  Ahmed, O.H., Hind, M, Thomas, B., Hewitt-Taylor, J. (2013) The Conceptual and Practical Ethical Dilemmas of Using Health Discussion Board Posts as Research Data, Journal of Medical Internet Research 15(6):e112)  Web address: http://www.jmir.org/2013/6/e112/
  10. Parker, J.  (2008) Email, ethics and data collection in social work research: some reflections from a research project, Evidence & Policy: A Journal of Research, Debate & Practice, 4 (1): 75-83.
  11. Hundley, V, Cheyne, HC, Bland, JM, Styles, M, Barnett, CA.. (2010) So you want to conduct a cluster randomised controlled trial? Lessons from a national cluster trial of early labour, Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice 16: 632-638
  12. Helmreich, R.J., Hundley, V., Norman, A., Ighedosa, J., Chow, E. (2007) Research in pregnant women: the challenges of informed consent, Nursing for Women’s Health 11(6):  576-585.
  13. Parker, J., Penhale, B., Stanley, D., 2010. Problem or safeguard? Research ethics review in social care research and the Mental Capacity Act 2005. Social Care & Neurodisability, 1 (2): 22-32.
  14. Parker, J., Penhale, B., Stanley, D. (2011) Research ethics review: social care and social science research and the Mental Capacity Act 2005, Ethics & Social Welfare, 5(4): 380-400.

 

Vanora Hundley, Sara Ashencaen Crabtree, Jonathan Parker & Edwin van Teijlingen

 

 

Festival of Learning – Testament to a Successful Morning (Dr Simon Thompson, DEC Psychology Research Centre)

BU Challenges, Featured academics, Festival of Learning, Fusion, Research Ethics, Research Integritiy, Training

‘Testamentary Capacity in Dementia’ (03 June 2013 10:00h – 13:00h) – Presentation followed by in-depth plenary session about the complexities of leaving an estate to beneficiaries following a diagnosis of dementia.

‘Dementia’ is an umbrella term used to describe many types of deteriorating diseases – the most common ones are Alzhiemer’s disease, Vascular dementia, and Lewy body dementia.

Many married couples own property as ‘joint tenants’. Upon death, ownership automatically passes to the survivor. If property is owned as ‘tenants in common’, one half of the estate belonging to the deceased is dealt with by their Will. Problems arise when there is no Will, when others make a claim, or when another Will is executed.

‘Testamentary capacity’ is a person’s legal and mental ability to make a
valid Will. There are three premises: Presumption of capacity; Requirements; Proof of testamentary capacity.

It is proposed that the law should allow testators alternative means of satisfying the testamentary capacity standard such as an option to validate a testator’s capacity during their lifetime through forensic assessment measuring cognitive elements of testamentary capacity.

It does not remove the difficulty of knowing the status of person at a specific time line. However, it goes some way to describing a person during their lifetime in terms of mental ability and capacity.

Thompson, SBN (2006). Dementia and memory: a handbook for students and professionals. Aldershot: Ashgate.

Thompson, SBN (2012). Dementia. In SBN Thompson (Ed), Psychology of trauma: clinical reviews, case histories, research (pp169-202). Portsmouth: Blackwell-Harvard-Academic.

Publish empirical or experimental data early whilst letting theory mature?

BU research, PG research, Publishing, Research assessment, Research Ethics, Research Integritiy, Training

My colleagues and I have written several papers to help budding researchers about the process of writing and publishing academic papers (Hundley, & van Teijlingen 2002; van Teijlingen 2004; Pitchforth et al. 2005; van Teijlingen et al. 2012; Simkhada et al. 2013). For all researchers – students and staff alike publishing research findings is important as new insights will add to the existing knowledge base, advance the academic discipline and, in the case of applied research, perhaps improve something in the lives of others such as, well-being, the economy or the environment. Apart from this general/altruistic drive to add to knowledge, the advice academics give our postgraduate students is: to get your study published as soon as possible. The two main reasons for publishing early are: (a) getting into print to potentially help your careers; and (b) staking once claim as an authority in the field and/or publishing your findings before someone else does.
As always there are exceptions to the rule. As academics we agree that trying to get into print early is a good personal strategy for an early researcher or a postgraduate student especially for those working with empirical or experimental data. However, occasionally it is better to wait and give the underlying idea in the paper time to develop and mature. The kind of paper that often improves with time is one based on theory. Let me share a personal example: a theoretical paper from my PhD (awarded by the University of Aberdeen in 1994). This paper started life as a theory chapter in my PhD thesis (van Teijlingen 1994). This chapter on models of maternity care was not the strongest part of my thesis and it took me another decade of fine-tuning to get it into a state worth publishing. The paper ‘A Critical Analysis of the Medical Model as used in the Study of Pregnancy and Childbirth’ was finally published in Sociological Research Online, the original online-only Sociology journal in the world (van Teijlingen 2005). The wait was worthwhile as the paper is today (May 2013), eight year after publication, the seventh ‘most viewed articles during the past eight weeks’ in the journal (see: http://www.socresonline.org.uk/stats/top20.html).
In conclusion, it is generally sound advice to new researchers and postgraduate students to publish early. Occasionally though, waiting and giving your paper time to improve through discussion with colleagues, presenting the ideas at conferences and on blogs may lead to a better final product.
Prof. Edwin van Teijlingen
Centre for Midwifery, Maternal & Perinatal Health
School of Health & Social Care

References
Hundley, V., van Teijlingen E. (2002) How to decide where to send an article for publication? Nursing Standard 16(36): 21.
van Teijlingen (1994) A social or medical comparison of childbirth? : comparing the arguments in Grampian (Scotland) and the Netherlands (PhD thesis), Aberdeen: University of Aberdeen. Available online in the British Library (search for: uk.bl.ethos.387237 ).
Teijlingen van, E. (2004) Why I can’t get any academic writing done, Medical Sociology News 30 (3): 62-6.
van Teijlingen, E. (2005) A Critical Analysis of the Medical Model as used in the Study of Pregnancy and Childbirth, Sociological Research Online 10(2) Freely available online at: www.socresonline.org.uk/10/2/teijlingen.html.
Pitchforth, E., Porter, M., Teijlingen van, E.R., Forrest Keenan, K. (2005) Writing up and presenting qualitative research in family planning and reproductive health care, Journal of Family Planning & Reproductive Health Care 31 (2): 132-135.
Teijlingen van, E., Simkhada. P.P., Simkhada, B., Ireland, J. (2012) The long and winding road to publication, Nepal Journal Epidemiology 2(4): 213-215. http://nepjol.info/index.php/NJE/article/view/7093
Simkhada, P., van Teijlingen, E., Hundley, V. (2013) Writing an academic paper for publication, Health Renaissance 11 (1): 1-5. www.healthrenaissance.org.np/uploads/Pp_1_5_Guest_Editorial.pdf

Useful research ethics documents now available – participant information sheet and consent form

BU research, Research Ethics

The University has produced two useful research ethics documents; the first is a helpful guide to preparing your participant information sheet and the second is a sample consent form. Both documents can be accessed on the Research Ethics page on the blog.

If your research involves human participation, please take a look at the documents and discuss them with your supervisor/ethics representative if you have any questions.

These documents were drafted in consultation with the school’s ethics representatives and they are meant to be guidelines of best practice.

Link to ETHICS on the Staff Intranet

BU research, Research Ethics

The Staff Intranet ribbon has a new ETHICS icon, which will direct you to the Research Ethics page on the blog. Go to the Staff Intranet, scroll to the bottom and click on the right arrow to find the ETHICS icon. This new icon on the Staff Intranet will make it easier for researchers to find information on BU’s research ethics policy and procedures.

BU is committed to promoting and upholding the highest quality academic and ethical standards in all its activities. BU’s research governance and ethics policies and procedures recognize the importance of addressing ethical matters, while supporting the achievement of its collective research objectives. To this end, robust research governance and ethics policies and procedures underpin all research at the University. Further information can be found on the Research Ethics page on the blog, accessible here, or via the ETHICS icon on the Staff Intranet.

Research Ethics training course coming soon!

BU research, Research Ethics

You asked, we delivered! That’s right, due to popular demand BU has invested in an online research ethics training course. The course is mainly for post graduate research (PGR) students and academic staff. The course covers standard practice and recent changes in universities’ ethics relating to research that investigates people and their data. The course applies, for example, to the healthcare disciplines, to natural and social sciences, education and welfare services, humanities, law and media studies. Ethics standards apply very generally across many topics, methods and disciplines of research. This course has used several health research examples, because the ethics questions tend to stand out clearly in health research. Viewers working in other disciplines are invited to consider how the same questions apply to their own research.

The aims of the course are to help you to:

  • understand and use the frameworks and basic tools in research ethics debates
  • explain and justify your decisions about research ethics
  • know about resources for extending and updating your knowledge of ethics.

Please keep an eye on the blog for more information regarding when the course will go live. The course will be accessible via myBU.

NEW Online Ethics Checklist Launches TODAY!!

BU research, Research Ethics

I’m pleased to announce that the new online ethics checklist is live! Click HERE to access the online ethics checklist. Please keep in mind that if you submit a checklist, the person you indicated as you supervisor will receive an email notifying them of your submission.

Our IT developers have done a fantastic job creating an easy, collapsible, web-based form to replace our current paper checklist; the best part is that the form is collapsible, so it is entirely researcher specific. Not only will this online form streamline the submission process across the University, it will also provide a central repository for all approved checklists to facilitate the improvement of compliance within the Schools. The new online ethics checklist will soft launchs today for two months of beta testing and will fully launch on 1 January 2013. This two month period will give us time to beta test the checklist with a handful of student groups across BU to ensure all the technical bugs are sorted out.

Would you like to be involved in the beta testing? If so, please get in touch with me and we’ll set everything up! I’ve already had a handful of volunteers to test the checklist, but please let me know if you’d like to get involved. Additionally, please let me know if you’d like a sneak peek of the online checklist – I’m more than happy to give you a quick tutorial.

The link to the new checklist will be made available on the Research Ethics website.

 

NEW Online Ethics Checklist Launches on 1 November!!

BU research, Research Ethics

I’m pleased to announce that the new online ethics checklist is developed and ready to go live! Our IT developers have done a fantastic job creating an easy, collapsible, web-based form to replace our current paper checklist; the best part is that the form is collapsible, so it is entirely researcher specific. Not only will this online form streamline the submission process across the University, it will also provide a central repository for all approved checklists to facilitate the improvement of compliance within the Schools. The new online ethics checklist will soft launch on 1 November for two months of beta testing and fully launch on 1 January 2013. This two month period will give us time to beta test the checklist with a handful of student groups across BU to ensure all the technical bugs are sorted out.

Would you like to be involved in the beta testing? If so, please get in touch with me and we’ll set everything up! I’ve already had a handful of volunteers to test the checklist, but please let me know if you’d like to get involved. Additionally, please let me know if you’d like a sneak peek of the online checklist – I’m more than happy to give you a quick tutorial.

The link to the new checklist will be made available on the Research Ethics website as well as being placed on myBU.

4th World Business Ethics Forum – 16-18 December 2012, Hong Kong

Funding opportunities, Research Ethics, Research news, Uncategorized

The 4th World Business Ethics Forum (WBEF) will be held from 16 to 18 December 2012 by the School of Business of Hong Kong Baptist University (HKBU).  BU have received an invitation to submit papers for presentation at the Conference.

The theme for this 4th WBEF is Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) and Sustainability.  HKBU welcome research papers related to this broad theme.  Suggested topics include:

Dimensions and theories of CSR; CSR and risk management; CSR and business ethics; CSR and strategic management; CSR and corporate sustainability; CSR and corporate governance; CSR reporting and capital market; Corporate sustainability management; Legal issues of CSR; CSR in Asia; CSR in China; CSR education; CSR case studies; CSR in western perspectives; and other related issues.

They anticipate that over 150 scholars and professionals across the world will attend the Conference.  Selected papers from the Conference will be published in a special issue of Journal of Business Ethics.

The deadline for paper submission is 30th June 2012.  Please submit the full paper and enquiries to the Conference Secretariat at wbef@hkbu.edu.hk.  Email submissions in Word format are strongly preferred.  Submission of full paper for review indicates that it or a similar version has not been previously published or is not simultaneously under review elsewhere.  Each submission should include FULL contact details, including the author(s)’ brief bio, institution affiliation, mailing address, telephone and fax number, e-mail address, topic area (up to three topics selected from the above).  Full paper should not be more than 40 pages in double-line spacing (all inclusive) and must follow the style guidelines of the Journal of Business Ethics (JBE).

For more details of the Conference, please visit the web site at http://www.hkbu.edu.hk/~wbef.  The Conference Committee will select full papers on a competitive basis, and author(s) will be notified by September 2012.

How ‘ethical’ are you? Test your knowledge and win a prize!

BU research, Research Ethics

Research Ethics Quiz

Time to toss out the dunce cap and proudly adorn your thinking cap – if you get all of the answers correct, you will win a prize.  Good luck and happy ethics!

    ACROSS

    6. Outputs, impact, environment – we’re all looking forward to the submission date in 2013

    7. The main focus of this blog

    8. The team that is responsible for all operational aspects of the pre- and post-award administration of research and knowledge exchange bids and awards

    13. Stream of funding that exists to support a range of practical initiatives and pump prime activity around Fusion

    14. Describes the myriad of ways in which the activity and benefits of higher education and research can be shared with the public, involving interation and listening, with the goal of generating mutual benefit

    DOWN

    1. The moral principles guiding research including inception, aims, completion, publication or results and beyond

    2. Will replace EU's FP7

    3. This initiative forms part of the Fusion Investment Fund and by becoming a member this will provide staff with access to a range of support services and advice not available to non-members and is open to staff of all grades with a range of experiences, not just junior colleagues

    4. The new Publications Management System

    5. BU’s database that tracks all pre- and post-award bids and projects

    9. The best university in the UK!

    10. The creation of better or more effective products, processes, services, technologies, or ideas that are readily available to markets, governments, and society

    11. England's primary funding body

    12. The team that is responsible for all strategic, policy, process and quality aspects of research and knowledge exchange activity across BU, and particularly those which help to develop, enhance and stregthen our research culture

    Your Name (required)

    Your Email (required)

    Your Office Number (so I know where to send the prize)

     

     

    The RDU wants YOU!

    BU research, Research Ethics

    Calling all Supervisors and Staff – this is your opportunity to comment on BU’s ethics review process!

    Do you supervise students on their research projects (or do you conduct your own research)?  Are you happy with the current BU research ethics review process?  Do you have suggestions/comments/frustrations about the policies and procedures in place?

    If you find yourself gnawing at the bit with comments but not knowing how to express them, you’re in luck – I’m conducting a University-wide research ethics review, which will seek to validate implementation of a more streamlined ethics review process while also creating policies and procedures that are both robust and flexible…..and I want to hear from YOU!

    Over the past couple of weeks I have met with each School Representative to the University Research Ethics Committee (UREC) and over the coming weeks I will meet with the Deans and/or Deputy Deans to discuss the current ethics review policies and to propose changes to the process.  My aim for this review is to be as inclusive as possible, so I would like to open the opportunity to comment to all supervisors and staff involved in research here at BU.  If you’d like to meet with me as a group (School, framework, etc.), I’m happy to work out a day/time that works for everyone.  However, if you’d like to meet one-on-one, that suits me just fine as well.  Please send me an email at jhastingstaylor@bournemouth.ac.uk if you’d like to get involved!