Literature DB >> 24331902

Ethics is for human subjects too: participant perspectives on responsibility in health research.

Susan M Cox1, Michael McDonald2.   

Abstract

Despite the significant literature as well as energy devoted to ethical review of research involving human subjects, little attention has been given to understanding the experiences of those who volunteer as human subjects. Why and how do they decide to participate in research? Is research participation viewed as a form of social responsibility or as a way of obtaining individual benefits? What if anything do research subjects feel they are owed for participation? And what do they feel that they owe the researcher? Drawing on in-depth individual interviews conducted in 2006 and 2007 with 41 subjects who participated in a variety of types of health research in Canada, this paper focuses on subject perspectives on responsibility in research. Highlighting the range of ways that subjects describe their involvement in research and commitments to being a 'good' subject, we present a typology of narratives that sheds new light on the diverse meanings of research participation. These narratives are not mutually exclusive or prescriptive but are presented as ideal types typifying a set of circumstances and values. As such, they collectively illuminate a range of motivations expressed by human subjects as well as potential sources of vulnerability. The typology adds a new dimension to the literature in this area and has significant implications for researchers seeking more human-subject centred approaches to research recruitment and retention, as well as research ethics boards trying to better anticipate the perspectives of prospective participants.
Copyright © 2013 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Canada; Narratives; Participant perspectives; Protection of human subjects; Research ethics; Responsibility

Mesh:

Year:  2013        PMID: 24331902     DOI: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2013.09.015

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


  11 in total

1.  Why do children decide not to participate in clinical research: a quantitative and qualitative study.

Authors:  Irma M Hein; Pieter W Troost; Martine C de Vries; Catherijne A J Knibbe; Johannes B van Goudoever; Ramón J L Lindauer
Journal:  Pediatr Res       Date:  2015-04-09       Impact factor: 3.756

2.  Exploring obstacles to critical care trials in the UK: A qualitative investigation.

Authors:  Natalie Pattison; Nishkantha Arulkumaran; Sally Humphreys; Tim Walsh
Journal:  J Intensive Care Soc       Date:  2016-08-22

3.  A Participant-Centered Approach to Understanding Risks and Benefits of Participation in Research Informed by the Kidney Precision Medicine Project.

Authors:  Catherine R Butler; Paul S Appelbaum; Heather Ascani; Mark Aulisio; Catherine E Campbell; Ian H de Boer; Ashveena L Dighe; Daniel E Hall; Jonathan Himmelfarb; Richard Knight; Karla Mehl; Raghavan Murugan; Sylvia E Rosas; John R Sedor; John F O'Toole; Katherine R Tuttle; Sushrut S Waikar; Michael Freeman
Journal:  Am J Kidney Dis       Date:  2021-12-04       Impact factor: 11.072

4.  Accessing health services through the back door: a qualitative interview study investigating reasons why people participate in health research in Canada.

Authors:  Anne Townsend; Susan M Cox
Journal:  BMC Med Ethics       Date:  2013-10-12       Impact factor: 2.652

5.  Approaches to governance of participant-led research: a qualitative case study.

Authors:  Azure Dominique Grant; Gary Isaac Wolf; Camille Nebeker
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2019-04-02       Impact factor: 2.692

6.  Participants' awareness of ethical compliance, safety and protection during participation in pharmaceutical industry clinical trials: a controlled survey.

Authors:  Gerardo González-Saldivar; René Rodríguez-Gutiérrez; Jose Luis Viramontes-Madrid; Alejandro Salcido-Montenegro; Neri Alejandro Álvarez-Villalobos; Victoria González-Nava; José Gerardo González-González
Journal:  BMC Med Ethics       Date:  2019-01-08       Impact factor: 2.652

7.  Was it worth it? Older adults' experiences of participating in a population-based cohort study - a focus group study.

Authors:  Synneve Dahlin-Ivanoff; Therese Rydberg Sterner; Kaj Blennow; Ingmar Skoog; Hanna Falk Erhag
Journal:  BMC Geriatr       Date:  2019-08-19       Impact factor: 3.921

8.  Challenges in the ethics review process of clinical scientific research projects in China.

Authors:  Zhu-Heng Wang; Guan-Hua Zhou; Li-Ping Sun; Jun Gang
Journal:  J Int Med Res       Date:  2019-09-20       Impact factor: 1.671

9.  The Impact of Communicating Uncertainty on Public Responses to Precision Medicine Research.

Authors:  Chelsea L Ratcliff; Bob Wong; Jakob D Jensen; Kimberly A Kaphingst
Journal:  Ann Behav Med       Date:  2021-10-27

10.  Participants' perception of pharmaceutical clinical research: a cross-sectional controlled study.

Authors:  Gerardo González-Saldivar; René Rodríguez-Gutiérrez; José Luis Viramontes-Madrid; Alejandro Salcido-Montenegro; Kevin Erick Gabriel Carlos-Reyna; Andrés Marcelo Treviño-Alvarez; Neri Alejandro Álvarez-Villalobos; José Gerardo González-González
Journal:  Patient Prefer Adherence       Date:  2016-04-29       Impact factor: 2.711

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.