At a research ethics workshop at the 2015 CSCW conference (Fiesler et al., 2015), researchers in our community respectfully disagreed
“Have you got ethics yet?” is a question asked frequently where health, social and behavioural sciences postgrads gather on campus.
Mike Adorjan and Rose Ricciardelli’s edited collection, Engaging with Ethics in International Criminological Research,
Nik Zeps and Tanya Symons AHRECS Consultant Breakthroughs in medicine often highlight the existing
In this post, Gary asks when it comes to research ethics review, whether something useful might come from social distancing
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.