• 主题
高级搜索  >
历史搜索 清空历史
首页> 外文期刊>BMC Medical Education >Being uninformed on informed consent: a pilot survey of medical education faculty
【24h】

Being uninformed on informed consent: a pilot survey of medical education faculty

机译：在知情同意的情况下不被告知：医学教育教师的初步调查

获取原文
           
页面导航
  • 摘要
  • 著录项
  • 相似文献
  • 相关主题

摘要

Background This paper describes a pilot survey of faculty involved in medical education. The questionnaire focuses on their understanding of IRB policies at their institution, specifically in relation to the use of student assessment and curriculum evaluation information for scholarship. Methods An anonymous survey was distributed to medical educators in a variety of venues. Two brief scenarios of typical student assessment or curriculum evaluation activities were presented and respondents were asked to indicate their likely course of action related to IRB approval. The questionnaire also asked respondents about their knowledge of institutional policies related to IRB approval. Results A total of 121 completed surveys were obtained; 59 (50%) respondents identified themselves as from community-based medical schools. For the first scenario, 78 respondents (66%) would have contact with the IRB; this increased to 97 respondents (82%) for the second scenario. For both scenarios, contact with the IRB was less likely among respondents from research-intensive institutions. Sixty respondents (55%) were unsure if their institutions had policies addressing evaluation data used for scholarship. Fifty respondents (41%) indicated no prior discussions at their institutions regarding IRB requirements. Conclusion Many faculty members are unaware of IRB policies at their medical schools related to the use of medical student information. To the extent that policies are in place, they are highly variable across schools suggesting little standardization in faculty understanding and/or institutional implementation. Principles to guide faculty decision-making are provided.
机译：背景资料本文介绍了对参与医学教育的教师进行的一项初步调查。问卷调查表侧重于他们对所在机构对IRB政策的理解，特别是与使用学生评估和课程评估信息获得奖学金有关。方法匿名调查被分发给各个地方的医学教育者。介绍了两种典型的学生评估或课程评估活动的简短场景，并要求受访者指出他们与IRB批准相关的可能行动方案。问卷还询问了受访者有关IRB批准的机构政策知识。结果共完成121项调查。 59（50％）被访者表示自己来自社区医学院。对于第一种情况，将有78位受访者（66％）与IRB联系;在第二种情况下，这一数字增加到97位受访者（82％）。对于这两种情况，研究密集型机构的受访者都不太可能与IRB联系。六十名受访者（55％）不确定其所在机构是否有针对奖学金使用评估数据的政策。五十名受访者（41％）表示，他们所在的机构未曾就IRB要求进行过讨论。结论许多教职员工并未意识到其医学院的IRB政策与使用医学生信息有关。就现有政策而言，它们在学校之间变化很大，这表明教师理解和/或机构实施方面的标准化很少。提供指导教师决策的原则。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱：kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备：11010802029741号 ICP备案号：京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有

  • 客服微信

  • 服务号