2017
DOI: 10.1186/s12961-016-0164-6
|View full text |Cite|
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

The concept of ‘vulnerability’ in research ethics: an in-depth analysis of policies and guidelines

Abstract: BackgroundThe concept of vulnerability has held a central place in research ethics guidance since its introduction in the United States Belmont Report in 1979. It signals mindfulness for researchers and research ethics boards to the possibility that some participants may be at higher risk of harm or wrong. Despite its important intended purpose and widespread use, there is considerable disagreement in the scholarly literature about the meaning and delineation of vulnerability, stemming from a perceived lack of… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1

Citation Types

1
131
0
9

Year Published

2017
2017
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
6
2
1

Relationship

1
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 170 publications
(142 citation statements)
references
References 27 publications
1
131
0
9
Order By: Relevance
“…84-85). However, given that there is no shared definition of what counts as vulnerability (Bracken-Roche et al, 2017), it is equally important that researchers' perceptions of vulnerability do not prevent participation on the basis of a participant's perceived incapacity to give informed consent (Perry, 2011).…”
Section: Methodsology and Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…84-85). However, given that there is no shared definition of what counts as vulnerability (Bracken-Roche et al, 2017), it is equally important that researchers' perceptions of vulnerability do not prevent participation on the basis of a participant's perceived incapacity to give informed consent (Perry, 2011).…”
Section: Methodsology and Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…V současnosti se pojem zranitelnosti objevuje nejčastěji v bioetice a výzkumné etice, v níž zaujímá ústřední pozici (např. Toader, Damir, Toader 2013;Gjengedal et al 2013;Bracken-Roche et al 2017;Cunha, Garrafa 2016).…”
Section: Zranitelnost Z Intersekcionální Perspektivyunclassified
“…A particular concern, given the subject matter of the interviews and the arguably vulnerable condition of the participants (who were all currently undergoing therapy), was the possible risk of distress to them. Those with 'mental health problems' are listed as vulnerable to discomfort and distress in a recent review of research ethics policies and guidelines (Bracken-Roche et al 2017).…”
Section: Ethical Issuesmentioning
confidence: 99%