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
Artificial Intelligence
Arts
Australia
Authorship
Belief
Beneficence
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
Evaluative practice/quality assurance
First People
Fraud
Gender
Genetics
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
Serious Adverse Event
Social Science
SoTL
Standards
Supervision
Training
Vulnerability
Young people
Exclude news

Sort by

Human Research Ethics Research Integrity

What does organizational diversity in New Zealand tertiary sector research ethics committees teach us about balancing consultative and governance approaches to ethics review? (Papers: Helen Gremillion, et al 2016)

Posted by saviorteam in Human Research Ethics on October 13, 2016
Keywords: Analysis, Ethical review, Human research ethics, Institutional responsibilities, Journal, New Zealand, Principles, Protection for participants, Research ethics committees, Researcher responsibilities, Social Science

The Linked Original Item was Posted On September, 5 2016

Abstract:
This article compares and contrasts the operational practices of ten tertiary research ethics committees in New Zealand, with an in-depth focus on five of these committees, contributing to an identified goal in the literature of rendering more visible the workings of such committees in order to promote applicant engagement. The authors expand upon a study by Tolich et al. (2015), which collected brief narratives from members of five committees and found that the ways committees are run vary quite significantly. In this article five additional narratives are considered, and all ten are compared, with particular consideration given to review processes for applications, and applicants’ levels of access to committee members and committee deliberations. We focus on the different ways that variously constrained institutions navigate the tension between ethical decision-making as regulatory activity, and researcher participation and engagement in this decision-making process. The reality and value of institutionally-specific operational practices is confirmed, and simultaneously, potential ‘best practice’ options that could be applied more broadly are explored. The article proposes questions for future research that emerge from suggestive patterns and points of contrast in the narratives.

Gremillion H, Snell D, Crosthwaite J, Finch B, Paterson J and Tavinor G (2016) What does organizational diversity in New Zealand tertiary sector research ethics committees teach us about balancing consultative and governance approaches to ethics review? New Zealand Sociology 31(4), pp4-27.
Publisher: https://search.informit.com.au/documentSummary;dn=339248951923644;res=IELHSS

Related Reading

‘The ethics approval took 20 months on a trial which was meant to help terminally ill cancer patients. In the end we had to send the funding back’: a survey of views on human research ethics reviews (Papers: Anna Mae Scott, et al | January 2021)

Principles of Māori & Indigenous research ethics (An annotated bibliography by Dr Lily George)

Related Links

  • About the contributors
  • About the keywords
  • Suggest a resource
  • Report problem/broken link
  • Request a Take Down

Compiled here are links, downloads and other resources relating to research integrity and human research ethics. more…

Resources Menu

Four hands solving a jigsaw against the sun blazing out of a cloudy sky

Research Integrity

  • Codes, guidelines, policies and standards
  • Guidance and resource material
  • Papers
  • Books
  • In the news

Human Research Ethics

  • Codes, guidelines, policies and standards
  • Guidance and resource material
  • Papers
  • Books
  • In the news

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

  • Home
  • Services
  • About Us
  • Contact Us
Menu
  • Home
  • Services
  • About Us
  • Contact Us
  • Company
  • Terms Of Use
  • Copyright
  • Privacy Policy
  • Disclaimer
Menu
  • Company
  • Terms Of Use
  • Copyright
  • Privacy Policy
  • Disclaimer
  • Support
  • Contact Us
  • Site Map
Menu
  • Support
  • Contact Us
  • Site Map

Australasian Human Research Ethics Consultancy Services Pty Ltd (AHRECS)

Facebook-f
Twitter
Linkedin-in