Show simple item record

dc.creatorGuta, Adrianen
dc.creatorWilson, Michael Gen
dc.creatorFlicker, Sarahen
dc.creatorTravers, Robben
dc.creatorMason, Catherineen
dc.creatorWenyeve, Gloriaen
dc.creatorO'Campo, Patriciaen
dc.date.accessioned2016-01-09T00:41:25Zen
dc.date.available2016-01-09T00:41:25Zen
dc.date.created2010-06en
dc.date.issued2010-06en
dc.identifierdoi:10.1525/jer.2010.5.2.35en
dc.identifier.bibliographicCitationJournal of empirical research on human research ethics : JERHRE 2010 Jun ; 5(2): 35-46en
dc.identifier.urihttp://worldcatlibraries.org/registry/gateway?version=1.0&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&atitle=Are+we+asking+the+right+questions?+A+review+of+Canadian+REB+practices+in+relation+to+community-based+participatory+research.&title=Journal+of+empirical+research+on+human+research+ethics+:+JERHRE+&volume=5&issue=2&date=2010-06&au=Guta,+Adrian;+Wilson,+Michael+G;+Flicker,+Sarah;+Travers,+Robb;+Mason,+Catherine;+Wenyeve,+Gloria;+O'Campo,+Patriciaen
dc.identifier.urihttp://dx.doi.org/10.1525/jer.2010.5.2.35en
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10822/1022876en
dc.description.abstractAccess barriers to effective ethics review continue to be a significant challenge for researchers and community-based organizations undertaking community-based participatory research (CBPR). This article reports on findings from a content analysis of select (Behavioural, Biomedical, Social Sciences, Humanities) research ethics boards (REBs) in the Canadian research context (n = 86). Existing ethics review documentation was evaluated using 30 CBPR related criteria for their sensitivity to relevant approaches, processes, and outcomes. A linear regression was conducted to determine whether specific organizational characteristics have an impact on the CBPR sensitivity: (1) region of Canada, (2) type of institution (university or a healthcare organization), (3) primary institutional language (English or French) and (4) national ranking with respect to research intensiveness. While only research intensiveness proved statistically significant (p = .001), we recognize REB protocol forms may not actually reflect how CBPR is reviewed. Despite using a single guiding ethical framework, REBs across Canada employ a variety of techniques to review research studies. We report on these differences and varying levels of sensitivity to CBPR. Finally, we highlight best practices and make recommendations for integrating CBPR principles into existing ethics review.en
dc.formatArticleen
dc.languageenen
dc.sourceeweb:332598en
dc.subjectEthicsen
dc.subjectFormsen
dc.subjectHumanitiesen
dc.subjectOrganizationsen
dc.subjectResearchen
dc.subjectResearch Ethicsen
dc.subjectResearchersen
dc.subjectReviewen
dc.subjectSocial Sciencesen
dc.subject.classificationHuman Experimentation Policy Guidelines / Institutional Review Boardsen
dc.subject.classificationSocial Control of Human Experimentationen
dc.titleAre We Asking the Right Questions? A Review of Canadian REB Practices in Relation to Community-Based Participatory Researchen
dc.provenanceCitation prepared by the Library and Information Services group of the Kennedy Institute of Ethics, Georgetown University for the ETHXWeb database.en
dc.provenanceCitation migrated from OpenText LiveLink Discovery Server database named EWEB hosted by the Bioethics Research Library to the DSpace collection EthxWeb hosted by DigitalGeorgetown.en


This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record


Georgetown University Seal
©2009—2019 Bioethics Research Library
Box 571212 Washington DC 20057-1212
202.687.3885