• 主题
高级搜索  >
历史搜索 清空历史
首页> 外文期刊>AJOB Primary Research >Perceptions of Research Ethics Practices: IntegratedEthicsTM Staff Survey Data from the VA Health Care System
【24h】

Perceptions of Research Ethics Practices: IntegratedEthicsTM Staff Survey Data from the VA Health Care System

机译：研究伦理实践的看法：VA卫生保健系统的IntegratedEthicsTM员工调查数据

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
       
页面导航
  • 摘要
  • 著录项
  • 相似文献
  • 相关主题

摘要

Background: There are limited empirical data on factors that influence ethical practices in research settings. To broaden our understanding of ethical practices in research in the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) and to understand researcher- and organizational-level factors associated with positive perceptions of practices, we assessed researchers' perceptions of practices in research ethics. Methods:We analyzed data from 10,661 respondents to the 2010 IntegratedEthics~(TM) Staff Survey (IESS) at VA who self-identified as research staff and who worked at facilities with Federalwide Assurance for the Protection of Human Subjects.We used descriptive statistics to evaluate these respondents' perceptions of ethical practices in research and multivariate logistic regression analyses to evaluate associations between researcher- and organization-level characteristics and positive perceptions of ethical practices. Results: The results suggest that the majority of researcher respondents have positive perceptions of ethical practices in research at VA; for example, 85% almost never feel pressured to compromise ethical standards. Physicians and staff with managerial responsibilities tend to have more favorable impressions of ethical practices in research. The results also indicate areas for improvement. For example, 14–16% of respondents report that there are research staff members who regularly engage in behaviors that may inappropriately affect their research. Furthermore, results suggest that approximately 14% of VA research staff are not completely comfortable raising ethical concerns or reporting ethical violations related to research. Conclusions: Results from this study identify areas for quality improvement that can serve as a complement to the required education and training in research ethics, policy guidance, and rigorous institutional review board oversight and monitoring.
机译：背景：关于影响研究环境中道德实践的因素的经验数据有限。为了拓宽我们对美国退伍军人事务部（VA）的研究中的道德规范的理解，并了解与实践的积极看法相关的研究人员和组织层面的因素，我们评估了研究人员对研究道德中的实践的看法。方法：我们分析了来自VA的2010年综合伦理〜（TM）员工调查（IESS）的10661名受访者的数据，这些受访者自认是研究人员，并且曾在联邦全人类保护组织的设施中工作。在研究和多元Logistic回归分析中评估这些受访者对道德实践的看法，以评估研究人员和组织级别的特征与对道德实践的积极看法之间的关联。结果：结果表明，大多数研究人员对弗吉尼亚州的研究中的道德规范持积极态度;例如，有85％的人几乎从来没有受到过折衷于道德标准的压力。负责管理的医师和工作人员往往对研究中的道德规范抱有更好的印象。结果还指出了需要改进的地方。例如，有14–16％的受访者报告说，有些研究人员经常从事可能会不适当地影响其研究的行为。此外，结果表明，大约14％的VA研究人员不完全愿意提出道德问题或报告与研究有关的道德违规行为。结论：这项研究的结果确定了质量改进领域，可以作为对研究道德，政策指导以及严格的机构审查委员会监督和监视所需的教育和培训的补充。

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