Student participation in health professions education research: in pursuit of the Aristotelian mean

Abstract

In research ethics reviews, traditional approaches of research ethics boards (REBs) balance the risks with the potential for benefit of proposed studies, and this review process has been similar for health professions education research (HPER) as it has been for clinically based studies. Health professions students are the primary population from which most education researchers draw their participants although relatively little discussion has taken place in the literature regarding student participation in HPER. The majority of HPER studies could be considered minimal risk and therefore many have suggested that such studies be exempted from REB review. However, there are not only risks to student participants which require consideration, but I argue that when this issue is viewed through the lens of Aristotle's virtue ethics, there are also potential benefits to the student, for which REB oversight can be helpful, that have not factored strongly into discussions. This paper seeks to highlight the key factors involved in student participation in HPER; to explore Aristotle's doctrine of the mean and to evaluate how this ethical framework can add value to the discussion; and to propose possible applications of the Aristotelian mean to this issue and address some of the challenges that would arise with its application.

Exploring ethical issues associated with using online surveys in educational research

“…Where Where circumstances necessitate sampling from one's own classes, and thus dual roles do exist, the resulting research is not inherently unethical (Regan, 2013). However, other professional relationships exist, the students/participants should be considered members of a 'vulnerable' population (Chen, 2011;Leentjens & Levenson, 2013) and extra care should be taken to minimise risk and adverse consequences, should students choose not to participate or withdraw from the studyconsent before a study's completion. As this issue of dual-roles colours how all other ethical issues should be considered and addressed, it will be revisited several times in the following sections.…”

“…Children and youth are classified in the AERA Code of Ethics as vulnerable populations, requiring educational researchers to "take special care to ensure that the voluntary nature of the research is understood and that consent or assent is not coerced" (Clause 13.01d). While this directly applies to children in primary and secondary education, the vulnerability of students in tertiary education has also been questionedalso requires careful consideration (Chen, 2011;Leentjens & Levenson, 2013). Higher education students (in contrast to school students) are adults who have voluntarily chosen to continue their studies (Stierer & Antonious, 2004).…”

Efecto de un programa de capacitación en competencias de investigación en estudiantes de ciencias de la salud

“…Así pues, la adquisición de competencias, como la habilidad para la gestión de información o la comunicación científica se hacen imprescindibles para el desarrollo del conocimiento clínico y consolidación de un perfil profesional fundamentado en una práctica clínica basada en evidencias en Ciencias de la Salud (4) . Diversos estudios muestran el efecto positivo que tiene la formación en competencias científicas en diferentes niveles formativos: grado, posgrado y formación continuada (5)(6)(7)(8) .…”

Minimizing Risks for Nursing Students Recruited for Health and Educational Research

“…30 Using an exemplar study, Ridley 7 highlighted how ethical principles can be upheld in nursing education research. 30 Using an exemplar study, Ridley 7 highlighted how ethical principles can be upheld in nursing education research.…”