ACN - 101321555 Australasian Human Research Ethics Consultancy Services Pty Ltd (AHRECS)

Resource Library

Research Ethics MonthlyAbout Us

ResourcesConsent

Australasian Human Research Ethics Consultancy Services Pty Ltd (AHRECS)

Friday afternoon’s funny – Santa and the future study coordinator0

Posted by Admin in on December 6, 2019
 

Cartoon by Don Mayne www.researchcartoons.com

Any similarity to study coordinators (whether real or fictional) is coincidental, but pretty darn spooky… you know who you are.

Disgraced tracheal transplant surgeon is handed 16 month prison sentence in Italy (Papers: Michael Day | November 2019)0

Posted by Admin in on December 5, 2019
 

Disgraced surgeon Paolo Macchiarini, who faked research relating to dangerous and largely discredited tracheal transplants, has been handed a 16 month prison sentence in Italy for forging documents and abuse of office.

Macchiarini made headlines around the world after claiming a major breakthrough for patients with failing windpipes, by “seeding” an artificial scaffold with a patient’s own stem cells, to generate a functioning trachea.

But excitement at the prospect of a genuine medical advance turned to scandal when it emerged that Macchiarini had falsified results and misled hospital authorities regarding the health of those receiving the experimental procedures. The revelation prompted his research centre, the Karolinska Institute, to eventually disown his …

Day, M. (2019) Disgraced tracheal transplant surgeon is handed 16 month prison sentence in Italy. BMJ. 367:l6676. doi: 10.1136/bmj.l6676. No abstract available. PMID: 31767600
Publisher: https://www.bmj.com/content/367/bmj.l6676

Participant understanding and recall of informed consent for induced pluripotent stem cell biobanking (Papers: Tristan McCaughey, et al | 2016)0

Posted by Admin in on December 1, 2019
 

Abstract
The ability to generate human induced pluripotent stem cells (iPSCs) has opened new avenues for human disease modelling and therapy. The aim of our study was to determine research participants’ understanding of the information given when donating skin biopsies for the generation of patient-specific iPSCs. A customised 35-item questionnaire based on previous iPSC consent guidelines was sent to participants who had previously donated samples for iPSC research. The questionnaire asked pertinent demographic details, participants’ motivation to take part in iPSC research and their attitudes towards related ethical issues. 234 participants were contacted with 141 (60.3 %) complete responses received. The median duration between recruitment and follow-up questioning was 313 days (range 10–573 days). The majority of participants (n = 129, 91.5 %) believed they understood what a stem cell was; however, only 22 (16.1 %) correctly answered questions related to basic stem cell properties. We found no statistically significant difference in responses from participants with different levels of education, or those with a health sciences background. The poor understanding amongst participants of iPSC research is unlikely to be unique to our study and may impact future research if not improved. As such, there is a need to develop an easily understood yet comprehensive consent process to ensure ongoing ethical progress of iPSC biobanking.

Keywords
Stem cell, Informed consent, HeLa, Biobank

McCaughey T., Chen C.Y., De Smit E., Rees G., Fenwick E., Kearns L.S., Mackey D.A., MacGregor C., Munsie M., Cook A.L., Pébay A. & Hewitt A.W. (2016) Participant understanding and recall of informed consent for induced pluripotent stem cell biobanking. Cell and Tissue Banking. 17: 449. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10561-016-9563-8
Publisher: https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2Fs10561-016-9563-8

Holiday funny – Potential participant duped0

Posted by Admin in on November 28, 2019
 

Cartoon by Don Mayne www.researchcartoons.com

Thanks Giving isn’t a holiday in Australasia and animal ethics really isn’t our thing, but we thought this Don Mayne cartoon was a chance to reflect on two ethical challenges in human research:
.
(i) Purporting to recruit participants for a research project when your motives are otherwise – which is potentially a merit & integrity and respect problem; and
.
(ii) Having a research topic and recruitment strategy that don’t match.
.

Which will almost certainly lead to participant complaints.

0