Articulating a Role for Program Evaluation in Responsible Conduct of Research Programs

Abstract

Since Integrity in Scientific Research: Creating an Environment That Promotes Responsible Conduct was released in 2001, there has been increased interest in evaluating programs designed to foster the responsible conduct of research (RCR). The field of program evaluation is designed to determine the worth or value of programs and can serve as a resource for institutions interested in evaluating their RCR programs. This article provides a very brief overview of program evaluation, demonstrates how it can be applied to RCR, and provides key reference information. Evaluating RCR programs can promote institutional accountability for the resources that are used in supporting those programs.

Implementation of a responsible conduct of research education program at Duke University School of Medicine

“…Evaluation of RCR education programs for effectiveness is important, but also conceptually and logistically challenging. The question of what, exactly, should count as effectiveness and how program outcomes should be measured is still an area of much discussion and debate (Mumford, Steele, and Watts 2015;Olson 2014). The need to implement a program expeditiously in the face of numerous feasibility and logistical considerations can temporarily override the need for comprehensive program evaluation.…”

“…This report describes how this program was implemented, what challenges and interim successes were identified, and how the program is currently evolving. Literature on RCR program development is limited (for example, Mumford, Steele, and Watts 2015;Olson 2014;Appendix C in NAS 2017), and this report may provide some guidance for other institutions and institutional leaders considering large-scale RCR education programs. The report also addresses the possibility of including deliberation of recent misconduct at an institution (i.e., internal misconduct) into core RCR education programs, with the goal of enhancing participation and learning, as well as institutional reflection and openness with respect to past research wrongdoing.…”

Research culture in biomedicine: what we learned, and what we would like to do about it

“…Although instruction in the principles and practices of rigor, reproducibility, and responsibility (R3) in research has been a component of traditional training programs in biomedical science for many decades, the methods and modalities of training have received renewed attention at academic institutions that rely on federal funding [31][32][33][34][35][36] . Several NIH institutes have issued funding opportunity announcements to develop, pilot, and disseminate training modules to enhance scientific rigor and data reproducibility, not only for training grant programs, but also for investigatorinitiated grant programs [37][38][39] .…”