Literature DB >> 25605609

A cross-sectional survey to investigate community understanding of medical research ethics committees.

Lin Fritschi1, Helen L Kelsall2, Bebe Loff2, Claudia Slegers2, Deborah Zion2, Deborah C Glass2.   

Abstract

Study explanatory forms often state that an ethics committee has approved a research project. To determine whether the lay community understand the roles of ethics committees in research, we took a cross-sectional national sample from three sampling frames: the general population (n=1532); cohort study participants (n=397); and case-control study participants (n=151). About half (51.3%) of the participants had heard of ethics committees. Those who had were more likely to be those who had participated in previous surveys, older participants, those born in Australia and those with higher education. Almost all participants agreed that the roles of an ethics committee were to protect participants' privacy and ensure no harm came to study participants and most agreed that the committee's role was to ensure that the research was capable of providing answers. Case-control and cohort participants were more likely than the general population to consider that the role of an ethics committee was to design the research and obtain research funding. Overall, we found that about half of the population are aware of ethics committees and that most could correctly identify that ethics committees are there to protect the welfare and rights of research participants, although a substantial minority had some incorrect beliefs about the committees' roles. Increased education, particularly for migrants and older people, might improve understanding of the role of ethics committees in research. Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://group.bmj.com/group/rights-licensing/permissions.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Codes of/Position Statements on Professional Ethics; Confidentiality/Privacy; Demographic Surveys/Attitudes; Epidemiology; Ethics Committees/Consultation

Mesh:

Year:  2015        PMID: 25605609     DOI: 10.1136/medethics-2013-101613

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Med Ethics        ISSN: 0306-6800            Impact factor:   2.903


  1 in total

1.  A telephone survey of factors affecting willingness to participate in health research surveys.

Authors:  D C Glass; H L Kelsall; C Slegers; A B Forbes; B Loff; D Zion; L Fritschi
Journal:  BMC Public Health       Date:  2015-10-05       Impact factor: 3.295

  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.