Abstract For every doctoral student, living within the liminal space of approval from the human ethics committee before one can
This humorous Don Mayne cartoon depicts why potential participants in medical research should always be careful that their assumptions about a research project match the design of a project. Even though it is unlikely that a planned project will be this ghastly or dangerous, this is why research ethics review bodies should be aware of how researchers will describe their project in recruitment materials. This is to watch against text that might give a false impression about a project.
Abstract As the burden of misconduct in medical research is increasingly recognised, questions have been raised about how best to
Abstract Across disciplines there is a large and increasing number of research projects that rely on data collection activities in
In the past, we have played a direct role in the design and delivery of HREC member professional development for the NHMRC. We are now not proud of that involvement because it embedded poor practice into the conduct of research ethics review in Australia. Cases like this are shocking and such research practice needs to be blocked from ever happening again. But the use of an egregious case of medical research from US is unlikely to be considered relevant outside of the health sciences in Australia. Rather than using such cases for shock value or as justification for research ethics review and combative review decisions, it should be used as an opportunity to discuss, vulnerability, conflicts of interest, researcher responsibilities and clinical trial monitoring. That approach might seem to be a less shocking or engaging way to go, but it should result in better review decisions.
The accepted wisdom is that careful research to develop new treatments take many years, if not decades. It is the reason why there has been such a delay between the commencement of clinical trials and the availability of the treatment. That is why some worried that the availability of Covid treatments was an indication the research been rushed and so the vaccines where are unsafe. The reasoning being, fast research couldn’t be quality research. However, the response to the pandemic has shown it’s possible to do quality research research quickly.
Falsified results of medical research are a serious concern for a number of reasons:
(i) They can put lives at risk;
(ii) They can indicate fraud;
(iii) They can corrupt the scientific record;
(iv) They misdirect future inquiry; and
(v) Scandals such as this can undermine community and media trust in research.
For this reason, institutions must treat proven cheats and charlatans especially harshly.
Unless a researcher is careful, they can cause harm before a person consents to participate in a project. As pictured in this Don Mayne cartoon, body-shape shaming Santa would be an example of this. This consideration is why Chapter 3.1 of the National Statement on Ethical Conduct in Human Research prompts researchers and research ethics reviewers to consider whether a project’s recruitment strategy could be a source of risk. Undermining the self-worth of potential participants is a formal of risk. Shaming Santa is also probably a good way to get yourself on the naughty list. Whatever your religious, spiritual or scientific beliefs, the AHRECS team wishes you a safe and happy holiday season. We will continue working over the holiday period. Insert your own reference to Ebenezer Scrooge here.
