'Text-work' in Research Ethics Review: The significance of documents in and beyond committee meetings

Morton, Julie

doi:10.1080/08989621.2018.1537790

Cited by 4 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 34 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Principle-informed procedure has an important role, in that review work uses procedural texts to make decisions appear rational and neutral. 35 Nevertheless, the practical, emotional and subjective factors involved in decision-making go beyond the strictures of formal procedure. Much of review work is about finding coherence between these disparate elements, and finding a warranted solution to a practical moral problem is reached by questioning 'the tenability and relevance of all sorts of beliefs, none of which is immune to revision'.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Ethics review, reflective equilibrium and reflexivity

Morton

2021

Nurs Ethics

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Research Ethics Committees (RECs) or their equivalent review applications for prospective research with human participants. Reviewers use universally agreed principles i to make decisions about whether prospective health and social care research is ethical. Close attention to understanding how reviewers go about their decision-making work and consider principles in practice is limited. Objective: The study aimed to understand how reviewers made decisions in the contexts of meetings and to understand more about how reviewers approach their work. The purpose of this article is to draw on data and findings and to show how reflective equilibrium as a theoretical frame can (1) deepen understanding of ethics review and (2) permit a reflexive examination of the habitual processes of review. Design and participants: Methods captured the day-to-day work of the RECs. Seventeen applications were heard during eight observations. There were 12 formal interviews with reviewers (n = 12) and with researchers (n = 8) which are not reported on in this article. Ethical considerations: Organisational permission for the study was given by the National Research Ethics Service (NRES) whose functions became part of the Health Research Authority (HRA) during the study. The study was given favourable opinion by the University of Salford's REC (Reference HSCR11/17). Findings: Data were analysed using constructed grounded theory resulting in eight themes which revealed attention to procedure and engagement with applications. Reflective equilibrium was used as a qualitative frame to interpret themes distilling them into three processes at work in review: emotion and intuition; imagination and creative thinking; and intuition and trust. Discussion: Reviewers went back and forth between universal principles and considered these in the contexts of each application using the above processes. Conclusions: Reflective equilibrium offers a coherent and grounded account of review work. Reflexivity in training for reviewers is essential for improving practices. The challenges reflexivity presents can be assisted by using reflective equilibrium as a tool to illuminate tacit review processes.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Ethics review, reflective equilibrium and reflexivity

Morton

2021

Nurs Ethics

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…A primary focus of RECs on principles of autonomy, beneficence or ethics as harm and benefits was reported in seven studies that analysed RECs outputs, 22–28 but none considered equitable recruitment, equitable distribution of risks and benefits, fair participation and/or justice issues under which gender would fall. Another five studies reported on the concerns of RECs around issues of fair participation or related criteria such as inclusion criteria, recruitment criteria, representativeness, legitimacy and appropriate risk benefit analysis, 10 , 29–32 with none mentioning sex or gender. A case study of a REC for ‘tribal nations’ described its role vis-a-vis culture and norms in reviewing multicentric research, but did not include sex and gender considerations.…”

Section: Consideration Of Gender (Or Lack Thereof) By Recsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Silaigwana and Wassenaar 34 have also reported such reticence on the part of RECs. Morton 29 called for more transparency on how RECs make decisions, and as well as other authors, 29 , 45–47 used qualitative and ethnographic methods to study how RECs make decisions, and have provided recommendations for understanding, improving and evaluating the functions of RECs. Evaluation frameworks for RECs can also be gender blind.…”

Section: Consideration Of Gender (Or Lack Thereof) By Recsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Considerations of sex and gender dimensions by research ethics committees: a scoping review

Saxena¹,

Lasher

Somerville

et al. 2022

International Health

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Despite a growing consensus on the importance of integrating sex and gender in health research, research across disciplines continues to be conducted and reported without a gender focus. Research ethics committees (RECs) can play a particularly powerful role in identifying the gender gaps at an early stage of the development of research protocols. Their role is missing in the dialogue related to improving gender awareness and analysis in health research. A scoping review was conducted to examine the extent to which RECs discuss and consider the inclusion and analysis of sex and gender in health research and to examine the literature regarding the gender balance of RECs. The limited literature around gender and research ethics reveals the power and potential of RECs to ensure that gender dimensions are thoughtfully included in health research, and sheds light on the gaps that exist. These include an under-representation of women on RECs, a lack of awareness of the importance of gender-related aspects in health research and a paucity of gender-related training to RECs. Guidelines such as the Sex and Gender Equity in Research guidelines are required for RECs to strengthen the ways in which health research is gendered from conception of a research protocol to its publication.

show abstract

“…e concern is the inappropriateness of some RECs to judge the merits of research in paradigms with which they are traditionally not familiar [12]. Often, ethical reviews are about compliance to policy; yet, there is a "distance between procedural compliance and actual ethical conduct in the practice of research" in qualitative research [14].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Educational Research Ethics Committees as Space for Situated Learning in Higher Education

Madikizela-Madiya

Motlhabane

2022

Education Research International

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper contributes a different perspective to the debates regarding the role of research ethics committees (RECs) in educational and social sciences research. It identifies limited explicit engagements from such debates about how academics who serve in RECs can learn from these committees towards academic growth and development in and beyond being ethical researchers. We (the authors) follow a duoethnographic method to reflect on our experiences of learning from one committee in a South African university. We argue that, notwithstanding the identified shortcomings in some of the REC committees, they can also be spaces for situated learning. Based on our experience, we identify several ways in which these committees can be resourceful. (1) They can empower the less experienced members through observation and interaction with the experienced. (2) They provide opportunities for the transfer of “knowledge power” to beyond the committee for quality research and postgraduate supervision practices. (3) They can be a solution to the limited research supervision capacity in some institutions. The paper also extends the understanding of the situated learning theory as we add ‘visitors’ as an element of the community of practice.

show abstract

'Text-work' in Research Ethics Review: The significance of documents in and beyond committee meetings

Cited by 4 publications

References 34 publications

Ethics review, reflective equilibrium and reflexivity

Ethics review, reflective equilibrium and reflexivity

Considerations of sex and gender dimensions by research ethics committees: a scoping review

Educational Research Ethics Committees as Space for Situated Learning in Higher Education

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About