Literature DB >> 17765376

Doing participant observation in a psychiatric hospital-- research ethics resumed.

Christine Oeye1, Anne Karen Bjelland, Aina Skorpen.   

Abstract

Social scientists who employ participant observation methods in medical settings are often held accountable for their research methods, specifically in regard to medical research ethics. However, the medical research ethics tradition rubs uneasily against participant observation and the anthropological understanding of the research process. The underlying premise for considering research ethics in the current case is the notion of the vulnerability of psychiatric patients as a participant group. Based on this notion of vulnerability among psychiatric patients, this article discusses the epistemological grounds for vulnerability in anthropological and medical research ethics. The authors draw on their experience with the Regional Committee for Medical Research Ethics in Norway, and the consequences of the guidelines used for participant observation as a research method in a psychiatric hospital. Social science researchers are required to follow medical ethical guidelines, such as informed consent, the principle of voluntariness, and estimation of risks and benefits. Ethnographers have found these guidelines to be obstructive when doing social science research in a psychiatric hospital. The article suggests the need for reformulation of research guidelines for participant observation in medical settings.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2007        PMID: 17765376     DOI: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2007.07.016

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Soc Sci Med        ISSN: 0277-9536            Impact factor:   4.634


  5 in total

1.  Participant observation of time allocation, direct patient contact and simultaneous activities in hospital physicians.

Authors:  Matthias Weigl; Andreas Müller; Andrea Zupanc; Peter Angerer
Journal:  BMC Health Serv Res       Date:  2009-06-29       Impact factor: 2.655

2.  Patients' subjective concepts about primary healthcare utilisation: the study protocol of a qualitative comparative study between Norway and Germany.

Authors:  Wolfram J Herrmann; Alexander Haarmann; Uwe Flick; Anders Bærheim; Thomas Lichte; Markus Herrmann
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2013-06-20       Impact factor: 2.692

3.  Procedure versus process: ethical paradigms and the conduct of qualitative research.

Authors:  Kristian Pollock
Journal:  BMC Med Ethics       Date:  2012-09-27       Impact factor: 2.652

4.  Being publicly diagnosed: a grounded theory study of Danish patients with tuberculosis.

Authors:  Hanne Konradsen; Troels Lillebaek; Torgny Wilcke; Kirsten Lomborg
Journal:  Int J Qual Stud Health Well-being       Date:  2014-04-23

5.  Collecting Information for Rating Global Assessment of Functioning (GAF): Sources of Information and Methods for Information Collection.

Authors:  Monrad Aas I H
Journal:  Curr Psychiatry Rev       Date:  2014-11
  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.