


Hong Kong Principles
The publication of the Hong Kong Principles comes at a time when there has never been more scrutiny of research. In this pandemic, the importance of science has been reinforced time and time again, but the importance of efforts to enhance reproducibility and transparency in research has also come to the fore. What the Hong Kong Principles do is provide a framework whereby research practices that strengthen integrity in research – a core component of reproducibility and trustworthiness – can be recognised, supported and rewarded.

Questionable publishing practice? Are you harmed?
Antony Ley (Information Policy Officer at Griffith University) & Gary Allen When considering whether a journal publisher is legitimate, researchers

What are questionable research practices as reported by ECRs in STEMM in Australia?
Katherine Christian, Carolyn Johnstone, Jo-ann Larkins, Wendy Wright and Michael Doran Katherine Christian, Federation University Australia Carolyn Johnstone, Federation University

The ethical petri-dish: recommendations for the design of university science curricula
Dr Jo-Anne Kelder, Senior Lecturer, Curriculum Innovation and Development, University of Tasmania, https://www.linkedin.com/in/jokelder/ Professor Sue Jones, Honorary Researcher, School of

Why autism research needs more input from autistic people
Elle Loughran Student, Trinity College Dublin Elle Loughran is a Laidlaw scholar studying genetics at Trinity College Dublin in Ireland

AHRECS and COVID-19
To date, we are delighted to report the extended team is virus-free. Our best wishes go out to any member

Question for Research Ethics Monthly readers: Win for your institution a new 12-month subscription to https://www.ahrecs.vip
Prof. Mark Israel and Dr Gary Allen We would like to encourage institutions to try out the ahrecs.vip set of

It’s the hand you’re dealt: Copyright card games and publishing board games are in!
Nerida Quatermass | University Copyright Officer | Project Manager, Creative Commons Australia at Queensland University of Technology As a university
Categories
Featured posts

A rose by any other name….?
As both a researcher and a research administrator in healthcare, one of the more vexing issues that I have to deal with on an almost daily basis is how to manage what are termed quality assurance, quality improvement and audit activities. In its 2014 publication entitled “Ethical Considerations in Quality Assurance and Evaluation Activities”, the NHMRC (NHMRC QA guidance) suggests that these can be loosely gathered together under an umbrella term of Quality Assurance (QA) and/or evaluation. I believe this construct is wrong and reinforces a longstanding approach to ethics review that relies on the category of an investigative activity to determine the level of review that is used. This approach is problematic and leads to some significant unintended consequences.

If you build it, they will come- 2020 Human Research Ethics Committee (HREC) Training Conference (online) 18-20 Nov
Approximately 2.5 months from inception to execution, a veritable cornucopia of Australia’s thought leaders

Going video: A chance to change review practice?
In this post, Gary asks when it comes to research ethics review, whether something useful might come from social distancing

A new approach to the AHRECS site
In response to community feedback, from 1 November 2020, only papers, books and genuine resources will be posted to the AHRECS Resource Library; news and announcements will be posted to the feeds page. Searches of the site can include searches of the feed. Links to Research Ethics Monthly editions will also be posted to the feeds page. Please bear with us as we move all existing news items over to the feed. Eventually, this approach will make it easier to distinguish between research outputs and news items about human research ethics and research integrity.