What Scientists Want from Their Research Ethics Committee

Abstract

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

Knowledge about the research and ethics committee at Makerere University, Kampala

“…As shown in figure 3, it is those researchers in the age range 40-49 that have had more than three protocols going through the faculty review committee;the majority of participants have had two or more protocols reviewed. The response rate among researchers in this study was 52%, which is fairly reasonable as compared to 49% by a similar study in Australian and 38%, in what scientists want from their institutional review committees 11,12 . There is also a 98%, 59% and 24% response rate in what institutional review committees look like of California State University USA 12 .…”

“…The response rate among researchers in this study was 52%, which is fairly reasonable as compared to 49% by a similar study in Australian and 38%, in what scientists want from their institutional review committees 11,12 . There is also a 98%, 59% and 24% response rate in what institutional review committees look like of California State University USA 12 . All the respondents had previous experience with the Faculty of Medicine review committee and had at least presented a research protocol for review.…”

“…[15][16][17] . It has never been a function of the committee to harass researchers although such a belief is also reflected elsewhere [11][12] . The researchers were also aware of the discipline function of the committee which is in agreement with other studies where the committee has powers to, suspend, or discontinue researcher's work, in addition to making them face suspension, or loss of privilege to conduct research 12 .…”

How to detect indications of potential sources of bias in peer review: A generalized latent variable modeling approach exemplified by a gender study

“…As a next step it would therefore be appropriate to conduct an in-depth evaluation study-such as was done by Bornmann and Daniel (2005a, b, 2006 for the selection process at the Boehringer Ingelheim Fonds (Heidesheim, Germany) and by Ledin et al (2007) for peer review in the fellowship program at the European Molecular Biology Organization (EMBO, Heidelberg, Germany). As both institutions had information on the applicants' scientific achievements up to the date of their fellowship applications, not only the potential sources of bias, but also the scientific performance (track record) of the applicants could be included in the statistical analyses.…”

Contenido y comprensibilidad de consentimientos informados: estudio comparativo entre ciencias biomédicas y ciencias sociales

“…La eficacia de un formato de consentimiento reside no sólo en que la información sea provista, sino también, y fundamentalmente, en que el mensaje sea comprendido y que los potenciales participantes de un estudio sean plenamente conscientes de las implicaciones de su decisión de participar en un protocolo de investigación 13 . De qué depende dicha comprensión y cómo puede facilitarse son asuntos que continúan investigándose en la literatura existente 14,15,16,17 .Considerable atención ha sido dedicada en estudios en los Estados Unidos a las características textuales (i.e., lecturabilidad y organización) de los formatos de consentimiento, encontrándose que los niveles de lecturabilidad son en promedio bajos y la organización no transparente a los lectores 18 .…”