An Analysis of Online Courses in Research Ethics in the Fogarty-Sponsored Bioethics Training Programs

Silverman, Henry; Strosberg, Martin A.; Luna, Florencia; Philpott, Sean; Hemmerle, Cheryl A.

doi:10.1525/jer.2013.8.5.59

Cited by 43 publications

(23 citation statements)

References 14 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…A review of these four courses showed that they are meeting almost 75% of what are considered best practices in distance learning and that almost 100% of the criteria are being met in one or more of the courses (Silverman et al, 2013). This suggests that the necessary skills and expertise exist within the Fogarty programs to bring all of the courses close to meeting all of the criteria by sharing a common set of best practices.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Curricular Aspects of the Fogarty Bioethics International Training Programs

Matar

Garner

Millum

et al. 2014

Journal of Empirical Research on Human Research Ethics

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The curriculum design, faculty characteristics, and experience of implementing masters' level international research ethics training programs supported by the Fogarty International Center was investigated. Multiple pedagogical approaches were employed to adapt to the learning needs of the trainees. While no generally agreed set of core competencies exists for advanced research ethics training, more than 75% of the curricula examined included international issues in research ethics, responsible conduct of research, human rights, philosophical foundations of research ethics, and research regulation and ethical review process. Common skills taught included critical thinking, research methodology and statistics, writing, and presentation proficiency. Curricula also addressed the cultural, social, and religious context of the trainees related to research ethics. Programs surveyed noted trainee interest in Western concepts of research ethics and the value of the transnational exchange of ideas. Similar faculty expertise profiles existed in all programs. Approximately 40% of faculty were female. Collaboration between faculty from low- and middleincome countries (LMICs) and high-income countries (HICs) occurred in most programs and at least 50% of HIC faculty had previous LMIC experience. This paper is part of a collection of papers analyzing the Fogarty International Research Ethics Education and Curriculum Development program.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Curricular Aspects of the Fogarty Bioethics International Training Programs

Matar

Garner

Millum

et al. 2014

Journal of Empirical Research on Human Research Ethics

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Both might benefit from training that highlights engagement as a legitimate focus of ethics review [35]. This might complement existing research ethics modules [36][37][38][39][40][41] developed by several institutions [42][43][44][45][46][47][48] that highlight practical skills using interactive features [36,39,41,[49][50][51][52][53][54][55][56]. This might also complement existing modules featuring engagement as a key part of ethical research (FHI 360) [46]; of ethical HIV vaccine trials, of ethical adolescent trials, and of public health research (TRREE) [42].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Strengthening stakeholder engagement through ethics review in biomedicalHIVprevention trials: opportunities and complexities

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

IntroductionClinical trials of biomedical HIV prevention modalities require the cooperation of multiple stakeholders. Key stakeholders, such as community members, may have stark vulnerabilities. Consequently, calls for HIV prevention researchers to implement “stakeholder engagement” are increasingly common. Such engagement is held to benefit inter‐stakeholder relations, stakeholders themselves and the research itself. The ethics review process presents a unique opportunity to strengthen stakeholder engagement practices in HIV prevention trials. However, this is not necessarily straightforward. In this article, we consider several complexities. First, is stakeholder engagement a legitimate component of what Research Ethics Committees (RECs) should review for HIV prevention trials? Second, what are the core features of engagement that should be under ethics review? Third, what are the key practices that should be highlighted in ethics review?MethodsTo address these questions, we examined the international ethics guidelines specialized for such trials (UNAIDS 2012, UNAIDS‐AVAC GPP 2011) and directly applicable to such trials (CIOMS 2016; WHO 2011). Thematic analysis was used to code and analyse these guidelines.Results and discussionEthics guidelines support REC review of engagement. Guidance recommends that engagement be broad and inclusive; early and sustained; and dynamic and responsive. Broad engagement practices include evaluating the context, planning in writing, and resourcing. RECs should assess engagement as part of a comprehensive review, and recommend revisions where necessary. Researchers should profile key elements of engagement valued in ethics guidance, when they draft ethics submissions. Importantly, the ethics review process should not undermine the ‘dynamic responsiveness’ required for excellent engagement in this field.ConclusionsAs evidence‐informed engagement strategies emerge, these should inform the ethics submission and review process. Both parties in the review process should strive to avoid a superficial, check‐list type approach that caricatures what should be a thorough, nuanced ethics review of a rich, responsive engagement process.

show abstract

“…Subsequently, additional training sites have incorporated hybrid distance-learning approaches into their curricula as Internet access, appropriate technology, and adaptable electronic training resources have emerged. Silverman et al (2013, this issue) conducted an evaluation of four current online courses using a combination of faceto-face and distance-learning approaches to identify areas for quality improvement. The results show that the courses meet most of the best practice criteria for the field of online courses.…”

Section: The Fogarty International Center’s Research Ethics Programmentioning

confidence: 99%

Introduction: The Fogarty International Research Ethics Education and Curriculum Development Program in Historical Context

Millum

Grady

Keusch

et al. 2013

Journal of Empirical Research on Human Research Ethics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In response to the increasing need for research ethics expertise in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs), the NIH’s Fogarty International Research Ethics Education and Curriculum Development Program has provided grants for the development of training programs in international research ethics for LMIC professionals since 2000. This collection of papers draws upon the combined expertise of Fogarty grantees, trainees, and other experts to assess the state of research ethics in LMICs, and the lessons learned over 12 years of international research ethics education; to assess future needs; and to chart a way forward to meet those needs. In this introductory paper we briefly sketch the evolution of research ethics as applied to LMIC research, the underpinning and evolution of the Fogarty bioethics program, and summarize key conclusions from the other papers in the collection.

show abstract

An Analysis of Online Courses in Research Ethics in the Fogarty-Sponsored Bioethics Training Programs

Cited by 43 publications

References 14 publications

Curricular Aspects of the Fogarty Bioethics International Training Programs

Curricular Aspects of the Fogarty Bioethics International Training Programs

Strengthening stakeholder engagement through ethics review in biomedicalHIVprevention trials: opportunities and complexities

Introduction: The Fogarty International Research Ethics Education and Curriculum Development Program in Historical Context

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About