Skip to content

ACN - 101321555 | ABN - 39101321555

Australasian Human Research Ethics Consultancy Services Pty Ltd (AHRECS)

AHRECS icon
  • Home
  • About Us
    • Consultants
    • Services
  • Previous Projects
  • Blog
  • Resources
  • Feeds
  • Contact Us
  • More
    • Request a Quote
    • Susbcribe to REM
    • Subscribe to VIP
Menu
  • Home
  • About Us
    • Consultants
    • Services
  • Previous Projects
  • Blog
  • Resources
  • Feeds
  • Contact Us
  • More
    • Request a Quote
    • Susbcribe to REM
    • Subscribe to VIP
Exclude terms...
Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander
AHRECS
Analysis
Animal ethics
Animal Ethics Committee
Animal handling
Animal housing
Animal Research Ethics
Animal Welfare
ANZCCART
Artificial Intelligence
Arts
Australia
Authorship
Belief
Beneficence
Big data
Big data
Biobank
Bioethics
Biomedical
Biospecimens
Breaches
Cartoon/Funny
Case studies
Clinical trial
Collaborative research
Conflicts of interest
Consent
Controversy/Scandal
Controversy/Scandal
Creative
Culture
Data management
Database
Dual-use
Essential Reading
Ethical review
Ethnography
Euthanasia
Evaluative practice/quality assurance
Even though i
First People
Fraud
Gender
Genetics
Get off Gary Play man of the dog
Good practice
Guidance
Honesty
HREC
Human research ethics
Humanities
Institutional responsibilities
International
Journal
Justice
Links
Media
Medical research
Merit and integrity
Methodology
Monitoring
New Zealand
News
Online research
Peer review
Performance
Primary materials
Principles
Privacy
Protection for participants
Psychology
Publication ethics
Questionable Publishers
Research ethics committees
Research integrity
Research Misconduct
Research results
Researcher responsibilities
Resources
Respect for persons
Sample paperwork
sd
se
Serious Adverse Event
Social Science
SoTL
Standards
Supervision
Training
Vulnerability
x
Young people
Exclude news

Sort by

Animal Ethics Biosafety Human Research Ethics Research Integrity

Research Ethics Monthly

ISSN 2206-2483

  • Home
  • >
  • Human Research Ethics
A graphic and symbols about Data Management.

Ethics Committees and Research Data Management

Dr Gary Allen March 14, 2023 No Comments
Read More
A grinning guard troll typing

Investigating an ethical barrier – should HRECs require gatekeeper approval from universities before external research?

February 14, 2022 No Comments

Investigating an ethical barrier – should HRECs require gatekeeper approval from universities before external research? | In this traffic post, Kate Christian questions the elephant in the room when it comes to research about universities.

Why do ethics committees require the approval of the institution?

Especially when participants aren’t vulnerable.

Whose interests are they protecting and why?

For national research, the results can be time-consuming, frustrating and add a little to the research.

Early career researchers might meekly accept this but it sucks time, energy and resources. But research Ethics committees should ask themselves the questions: Is this efficient and is it fair? Insisting upon institutional approval may well be skewing the data and distorting the results?

Read More
Exam answer sheet or application paper blurry view on table in examination room with blur education background of school university students taking exam test writing answer in seat row with stress

What do HREC members think and do when deciding about children’s participation in social research? Results from the MESSI survey

November 30, 2021 No Comments

In this guest post, Associate Professor Stephanie Taplin (UTS) reflects upon the reflections and attitudes of members of a research ethics committee when reviewing a project involving sensitive issues, where the participants are young people.

She reflects upon the degree that this consideration is based upon standards and expectations that are often not transparent to researchers and can be an impediment to useful/important research.

This post is based upon a longer research output that was about research exploring those attitudes.

This included whether there were topics that a research ethics committee member would never approve for a research project to explore with young people.

This work points to the need for specialist professional development for committee members relating to research on sensitive issues with young people.

This also raises the question of what guidance material institutions publish for researchers and for reference by research ethics reviewers.

Read More
Scrabble tiles spelling out the word "CONSENT"

Think of, and treat, consent as a powerful and complex verb, not a strictly defined and constrained noun

November 29, 2021 No Comments

The notion of consent and the expectation researchers will seek the prior consent of participants has a long history in human research ethics.

It has been a feature of many of the most infamous ethical Breakers commerce stamps and scandals.

Consequently, it has become a baked in feature of most of the guidelines on human research ethics.

But is that a good thing?

The typical approach to consent in human research doesn’t really work for a number of circumstances, research designs or potential how to participant pools.

Long strict guidelines can compound the error and can risk alienating researchers.

A more nuanced approach that provides guidance on necessary features of consent material can be more helpful than template consent materials.

This is exactly the kind of approach that this called for by the National Statement in Australia

Read More
Empty executive chairs in a meeting room

Expertise in ethics, research ethics or review?

November 29, 2021 No Comments

In this terrific and thoughtful post, Colin Thomson AM, a Senior Adviser to AHRECS, reflects on what we mean when we talk about expertise i the context of Human Research Ethics Review.

Do we mean expertise in ethics, research ethics or ethics review or a combination?

Do they fit together seamlessly and easily or is there an incongruence?

He frames these matters, when talking about research ethics committee members and research ethics reviewers across ten important categories.

He then suggests ten tests that could be usefully applied to evaluate the quality of review feedback.

How your institution’s research ethics committee and its review feedback fare if judged against this criteria?

Is it time they had some professional development? Does the Committee’s standard operating procedures need to be updated?

This is a valuable read for research ethics committee Chairs, Secretaries and members.

Read More
Learning Concept. Human hand with a black marker on a white background

HREC and AEC Workshops in Perth

October 25, 2021 No Comments

AHRECS is conducting Human Research Ethics and Animal Ethics workshops in Perth in November.

Wed 3 November 2021 – Animal Ethics workshop

The theme this year focuses on managing large groups of animals such as in laboratories, farms and in the wild.  Researchers are adept at managing animals, but when the numbers become very large things can become ethically complex.  For instance, how are the 3R principles being met?[iv]  Further, when there is overlap between research and the management of a farm or when research is focused on the needs of wildlife the ethical complexities of managing animals as part of research can increase. What are the key issues an AEC needs to focus on and how is this best approached? Expert speakers will address these issues covering the ethical considerations of integrating research into large farm operations, the ethical issues of undertaking environmental research involving large numbers of animals, and a panel of experts will discuss the ethical issues encountered when managing large laboratory projects involving animals.

Wed 17 November – Human Ethics workshop

The theme this year focuses on “what I wish I knew before I started”.   It is not uncommon for research to raise ethical questions that were not…

Read More
Error of judgment! Handwritten message on a white background.

Unnatural justice: Public allegations could cause significant harm to vital clinical trial activity

October 25, 2021 No Comments

In this thought-provoking post, Nik Zeps (a consultant with AHRECS and a partner at Chrysalis) discusses the serious harm (in terms of reputation and career, as well as lost useful lines of inquiry) when there are complaints that allege ethical problems with clinical research.

These relate to situations where the clinical research is evaluating different kinds of intervention, where the evidence for the ‘accepted’ treatment might not be clear.

A misunderstanding of such research designs and a visceral reaction to apparent breaches aren’t helpful.

When such allegations are made, the researchers are rarely afforded an opportunity to respond and explain. If they were, one assumes that the manner could be easily cleared up.

We are embarrassed to admit in our own reporting of the cited case we really didn’t grasp the realities of what occurred or called out the very emotive reaction.

Read More
Two 3d figures attempting to bridge a gap using jigsaw pieces

When it comes to the approach to human research ethics, did we buy London Bridge thinking it was Tower Bridge?

September 21, 2021 No Comments

In this post, two experienced research ethics officers risk being decried as heretics by reflecting upon the justifications that are used for the current Human Research Ethics arrangements in countries around the world.

They use the sale of London Bridge in the Sixties and the urban myth that the US millionaire who bought it thought he was buying Tower Bridge, to ask, given the time, effort and resources expended on research ethics review, are we getting what we paid for?

There are genuine benefits that can flow from a well-conducted review process and they do justify the existence of those processes, but we should stop claiming those processes safeguard us against the criminal, unethical and reckless behaviour of the past.

They don’t and we should stop claiming in our professional development activities and resource material they do.

Read More
Digital image of a folder with the words "GENETIC MANIPULATION" written on the outside and a stethoscope across it.

Regulation of human epigenetic editing: ensuring international frameworks for governing Human Genome Editing don’t impede vital medical research

August 31, 2021 No Comments

In this thoughtful post, Nik Zeps reflects on human genome manipulation in medical research, the ethical guidance in Australia and internationally.

He discusses CRISPR and the furore in 2018 around the ‘genetically modified babies’ in China.

Nik then discusses the degree to which the COVID-19 pandemic has pushed discussions about human genetic manipulation off the media radar.

Nevertheless, there have been important international discussions about the topic, including a new WHO Framework. This topic was recently discussed in a paper by Zeps, Lysaght et al. 2021.

The situation might position the WHO as a major player in the international discussion about human genetic manipulation.

Read More
Previous Page1 Page2 Page3 Page4 Page5 … Page22 Next

Categories

AHRECS Admin
17
Animal Ethics
5
Global Ethics
1
Human Research Ethics
169
Research Integrity
59
Services
31
Uncategorized
2

Featured posts

Folded news paper with the words "Extra Extra FOUL PLAY" visible above the folded

Are we missing the true picture? Stop calling a moneybox, a fishing hook

October 25, 2018 No Comments

It can be pleasing to see mainstream media taking an interest in research integrity,

Two people collaborating at a table

Ethics CoPs not Ethics Police: Building communities of practice in ethics and integrity

March 10, 2021 No Comments

In this post Gary Allen and Mark Israel discuss seeding and supporting virtual and physical Communities of Practice and their value over enforcement and policing.

Gary Allen and Mark Israel

Research ethics professionals have grown wary of researchers who talk disparagingly about the work of research ethics reviewers as the ‘ethics police’ (Klitzman, 2015; Makhoul et al., 2014). So, there is more than a little irony in our suggestion for responding constructively to such an adversarial stance (Allen & Israel, 2018) – the Community of Practice (CoP).

A CoP is characterised by a shared area of knowledge and set of practices within which experiences and insights can be shared and learning can be fostered (Wenger et al., 2002). Done well, a CoP can result in continual improvement across and…

The word data written on a card resting on a pile of other cards/words

The Ethics and Politics of Qualitative Data Sharing

February 5, 2020 No Comments

Mark Israel (AHRECS and Murdoch University) and Farida Fozdar (The University of Western Australia).

Taking Time in the Midst of a Crisis: Prior Informed Consent, Sociability and Vulnerability in Ethnographic Research

January 28, 2016 3 Comments

As an anthropologist, the way I work has particular features which are, in my

Subscribe to newsletter

The Research Ethics Monthly is a free monthly publication about human research ethics and research integrity. It is emailed to our subscribers generally towards the end of every month.

  • Enter the answer as a word
  • Hidden
    This field is hidden and only used for import to Mailchimp
  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

Related Links

  • Comment Rules
  • Complaints against the Research Ethics Monthly
  • Request a Take Down
  • Submission guidelines
  • About the Research Ethics Monthly
  • About Subscribing to the Research Ethics Monthly

Research Ethics Monthly

  • March 2020
  • January/February 2020
  • December 2019
  • November/December 2019
  • October/November 2019
  • September/October 2019
Load More

Research Ethics Monthly Receive copies of the Research Ethics Monthly directly
by email. We will never spam you.

  • Enter the answer as a word
  • Hidden
    This field is hidden and only used for import to Mailchimp
  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.
  • Home
  • Services
  • About Us
  • Contact Us
  • Home
  • Services
  • About Us
  • Contact Us
  • Company
  • Terms Of Use
  • Copyright
  • Privacy Policy
  • Company
  • Terms Of Use
  • Copyright
  • Privacy Policy
  • Site Map
  • Site Map

Australasian Human Research Ethics Consultancy Services Pty Ltd (AHRECS)

Facebook-f Twitter Linkedin-in