This document discusses conflict of interest in academic research. It notes that increased industry involvement has raised the potential for conflicts between researchers' financial interests and their primary duties. Conflicts can compromise research integrity and human subject protection. Disclosure requirements aim to manage conflicts, but some argue stricter policies like prohibiting certain relationships are needed. The document also defines scientific misconduct and motivations for it, like fabrication, falsification, and suppression of unfavorable results. Responsible conduct requires transparency and oversight to prevent improper influence on research.
This document discusses conflict of interest in academic research. It notes that as academic involvement in research has increased, so too has the potential for conflicts of interest where financial gain could influence research outcomes. It describes how granting agencies require disclosure of potential conflicts. The document outlines different types of conflicts, including financial interests, and how institutions are responsible for managing conflicts. It also briefly discusses scientific misconduct and the importance of transparency and oversight in protecting the integrity of research.
December 9, 2016
This symposium brought together a variety of experts to discuss key ethical and legal questions regarding offers of payment to research participants. Panels covered:
- Why payment is offered to research participants
- Regulatory parameters governing payment
- Whether payment to research participants should be considered exceptional, compared to payment in other contexts
- How offers of payment affect participants
- How to define coercion and undue influence with regard to paying research participants
- Which factors should be considered when evaluating proposed payments
- The problem of low payment
This event was free and open to the public.
This event was part of the collaboration between the Petrie-Flom Center for Health Law Policy, Biotechnology, and Bioethics at Harvard Law School and the Regulatory Foundations, Ethics, and Law Program of Harvard Catalyst | The Harvard Clinical and Translational Science Center at Harvard Medical School. Cosponsored by the MRCT Center of Brigham and Women's Hospital and Harvard.
Learn more on our website: http://petrieflom.law.harvard.edu/events/details/paying-research-participants
This document discusses whether paying research participants raises unique ethical issues compared to other contexts where people are paid. It presents arguments that research is exceptional and should have special ethical rules regarding payment. It argues that research produces public goods, researchers have professional duties to protect subjects, and the dependent relationship between researchers and subjects means subjects' consent may not be truly voluntary or informed. It concludes that while it has not proven research is uniquely different, there are reasons the traditional view treats research differently than other contracts and that institutional review is appropriate to critically examine payment arrangements.
December 9, 2016
This symposium brought together a variety of experts to discuss key ethical and legal questions regarding offers of payment to research participants. Panels covered:
- Why payment is offered to research participants
- Regulatory parameters governing payment
- Whether payment to research participants should be considered exceptional, compared to payment in other contexts
- How offers of payment affect participants
- How to define coercion and undue influence with regard to paying research participants
- Which factors should be considered when evaluating proposed payments
- The problem of low payment
This event was free and open to the public.
This event was part of the collaboration between the Petrie-Flom Center for Health Law Policy, Biotechnology, and Bioethics at Harvard Law School and the Regulatory Foundations, Ethics, and Law Program of Harvard Catalyst | The Harvard Clinical and Translational Science Center at Harvard Medical School. Cosponsored by the MRCT Center of Brigham and Women's Hospital and Harvard.
Learn more on our website: http://petrieflom.law.harvard.edu/events/details/paying-research-participants
Building Ethics into the Research with Vulnerable groups la71
This document discusses ethics considerations for research involving vulnerable groups. It identifies four dimensions of vulnerability and sources of vulnerability. Key ethical issues addressed include obtaining consent, power dynamics, sampling methodology, confidentiality, and research practices. Practical challenges are also discussed, such as time-consuming consent processes potentially excluding participants. Tactics for protecting participants are proposed, like disguising identities, narrative methods, and providing follow-up support. Overall, the document outlines important ethical guidelines to respectfully and equitably involve vulnerable populations in research.
Preliminary program of ISPOR Boston 2017Bruno Vayssié
This document provides information about the upcoming ISPOR Boston conference on health economics and outcomes research (HEOR). Some key points:
- The conference will be held from May 20-24, 2017 in Boston, MA and is expected to attract nearly 3,800 attendees from over 80 countries.
- It will feature over 1,850 presentations on topics related to HEOR including modeling, economic evaluation, patient preferences, real-world evidence, and health policy decision making.
- Plenary sessions will address pressing issues in US health policy, using social networks to impact population health, and the need for randomized controlled trials.
- Pre-meeting short courses and educational symposia are also offered to enhance
[Ringkasan]
Dokumen tersebut membahas tentang sistem hukum dan peradilan nasional Indonesia dalam 3 kalimat. Mencakup pengertian sistem hukum sebagai kesatuan hukum yang berlaku di suatu negara dan dipatuhi warganya, serta sumber-sumber dan tujuan hukum. Juga menjelaskan penggolongan hukum berdasarkan wujud, ruang, dan isinya, serta sanksi hukum pidana.
This document discusses conflict of interest in academic research. It notes that as academic involvement in research has increased, so too has the potential for conflicts of interest where financial gain could influence research outcomes. It describes how granting agencies require disclosure of potential conflicts. The document outlines different types of conflicts, including financial interests, and how institutions are responsible for managing conflicts. It also briefly discusses scientific misconduct and the importance of transparency and oversight in protecting the integrity of research.
December 9, 2016
This symposium brought together a variety of experts to discuss key ethical and legal questions regarding offers of payment to research participants. Panels covered:
- Why payment is offered to research participants
- Regulatory parameters governing payment
- Whether payment to research participants should be considered exceptional, compared to payment in other contexts
- How offers of payment affect participants
- How to define coercion and undue influence with regard to paying research participants
- Which factors should be considered when evaluating proposed payments
- The problem of low payment
This event was free and open to the public.
This event was part of the collaboration between the Petrie-Flom Center for Health Law Policy, Biotechnology, and Bioethics at Harvard Law School and the Regulatory Foundations, Ethics, and Law Program of Harvard Catalyst | The Harvard Clinical and Translational Science Center at Harvard Medical School. Cosponsored by the MRCT Center of Brigham and Women's Hospital and Harvard.
Learn more on our website: http://petrieflom.law.harvard.edu/events/details/paying-research-participants
This document discusses whether paying research participants raises unique ethical issues compared to other contexts where people are paid. It presents arguments that research is exceptional and should have special ethical rules regarding payment. It argues that research produces public goods, researchers have professional duties to protect subjects, and the dependent relationship between researchers and subjects means subjects' consent may not be truly voluntary or informed. It concludes that while it has not proven research is uniquely different, there are reasons the traditional view treats research differently than other contracts and that institutional review is appropriate to critically examine payment arrangements.
December 9, 2016
This symposium brought together a variety of experts to discuss key ethical and legal questions regarding offers of payment to research participants. Panels covered:
- Why payment is offered to research participants
- Regulatory parameters governing payment
- Whether payment to research participants should be considered exceptional, compared to payment in other contexts
- How offers of payment affect participants
- How to define coercion and undue influence with regard to paying research participants
- Which factors should be considered when evaluating proposed payments
- The problem of low payment
This event was free and open to the public.
This event was part of the collaboration between the Petrie-Flom Center for Health Law Policy, Biotechnology, and Bioethics at Harvard Law School and the Regulatory Foundations, Ethics, and Law Program of Harvard Catalyst | The Harvard Clinical and Translational Science Center at Harvard Medical School. Cosponsored by the MRCT Center of Brigham and Women's Hospital and Harvard.
Learn more on our website: http://petrieflom.law.harvard.edu/events/details/paying-research-participants
Building Ethics into the Research with Vulnerable groups la71
This document discusses ethics considerations for research involving vulnerable groups. It identifies four dimensions of vulnerability and sources of vulnerability. Key ethical issues addressed include obtaining consent, power dynamics, sampling methodology, confidentiality, and research practices. Practical challenges are also discussed, such as time-consuming consent processes potentially excluding participants. Tactics for protecting participants are proposed, like disguising identities, narrative methods, and providing follow-up support. Overall, the document outlines important ethical guidelines to respectfully and equitably involve vulnerable populations in research.
Preliminary program of ISPOR Boston 2017Bruno Vayssié
This document provides information about the upcoming ISPOR Boston conference on health economics and outcomes research (HEOR). Some key points:
- The conference will be held from May 20-24, 2017 in Boston, MA and is expected to attract nearly 3,800 attendees from over 80 countries.
- It will feature over 1,850 presentations on topics related to HEOR including modeling, economic evaluation, patient preferences, real-world evidence, and health policy decision making.
- Plenary sessions will address pressing issues in US health policy, using social networks to impact population health, and the need for randomized controlled trials.
- Pre-meeting short courses and educational symposia are also offered to enhance
[Ringkasan]
Dokumen tersebut membahas tentang sistem hukum dan peradilan nasional Indonesia dalam 3 kalimat. Mencakup pengertian sistem hukum sebagai kesatuan hukum yang berlaku di suatu negara dan dipatuhi warganya, serta sumber-sumber dan tujuan hukum. Juga menjelaskan penggolongan hukum berdasarkan wujud, ruang, dan isinya, serta sanksi hukum pidana.
Conflicts of interest can arise whenever a researcher stands to gain financially or career-wise from a particular study outcome. While not inherently problematic, conflicts of interest may compromise study design, conduct, or findings if not properly disclosed. Researchers should consider how their own interests or those of sponsors align with public welfare using the six Ps framework. Journals require conflict of interest disclosures to maintain integrity and transparency, as non-disclosure can damage credibility and result in paper retraction if biases are later discovered.
Conflict of interest, Confidentiality, InformedconsentAman Ullah
This document discusses several topics related to ethics in research including conflict of interest, informed consent, and confidentiality. It defines conflict of interest as secondary interests that may distort primary research interests. Researchers have a duty to disclose conflicts to prevent harming participants or public trust. Informed consent requires fully informing participants of a study's risks, benefits and alternatives. Consent may be implied in emergencies when patients cannot consent. Confidentiality is a set of rules limiting access to private medical information, though it can be overridden if disclosure protects public health.
A conflict of interest arises whenever there is any potential bias that could affect a researcher’s work. Avoid post-publication headaches by disclosing all conflicts of interest upfront.
This document discusses the importance of research bioethics. It notes that bioethics deals with ethical issues in biomedicine and biomedical research, including research ethics, medical ethics, dental ethics, and environmental ethics. It emphasizes three core principles of ethical research: informed consent, welfare of participants, and confidentiality/anonymity of participants. The document stresses that research ethics aims to protect human subjects and ensure research is conducted safely and for the benefit of society. It also discusses the roles and responsibilities of researchers to obtain proper consent and oversight and disseminate research results in an ethical manner.
Research ethics addresses the ethical principles and values applied to research. This includes ethical treatment of human and animal subjects, preventing misuse of research results, and addressing scientific misconduct. The key principles of research ethics are respect for persons, beneficence, and justice. Respect for persons means respecting individual autonomy and protecting vulnerable populations. Beneficence means research should do no harm and maximize benefits while minimizing risks. Justice means fairness in who bears risks and benefits from research. Research ethics aims to ensure ethical and responsible conduct of research through guidelines, oversight bodies, and codes of conduct.
The document discusses conflicts of interest in health research. It defines what constitutes a conflict of interest, which can be financial interests or personal biases that could unduly influence research. It outlines different levels of conflicts of interest, from individual researchers to institutional interests. While conflicts of interest are common, they could compromise research integrity if not properly managed. The document provides examples of conflicts of interest and discusses practical steps researchers can take to avoid or mitigate conflicts, such as disclosure, transparency and independent oversight.
The document discusses ethics in medical research and provides guidelines. It discusses key concepts like informed consent, minimizing risks and protecting vulnerable groups. Research must have essentiality and voluntary participation. Conflicts of interest can occur at various levels between researchers, sponsors and participants. Guidelines aim to balance research needs with ethical standards like accountability and transparency. Informed consent requires comprehension of risks/benefits and free, voluntary choice. Utility and respect for persons are foundations for ethics in research involving humans.
The document outlines best practices for responsible and ethical scientific conduct. It discusses several key practices including intellectual honesty in proposing, performing and reporting research; accuracy in representing contributions; fairness in peer review; collegiality in scientific interactions and sharing of resources; transparency in conflicts of interest; protection of human subjects; humane care of animals; adherence to responsibilities within research teams; and mentoring and advising. The goal is to exemplify and transmit the values associated with ethical scientific conduct to maintain trust in science.
This document discusses conflict of interest issues related to a clinical drug trial called Coughgone. It provides definitions and examples of conflict of interest, noting that conflicts can arise when secondary interests like financial gain influence professional judgments meant to primarily serve patients or scientific knowledge. The document analyzes potential conflicts in the Coughgone trial, including issues with the scientific credibility of the researchers, oversight and monitoring by the review board, and financial compensation structures. It concludes by discussing ways to minimize conflicts, such as disclosure and external review processes, as well as broader issues like potential bias and reliability of publications regarding drug effectiveness.
Research methodology ethical issues in research an assignmentMaiJoy
This document discusses six key ethical considerations in research: 1) informed consent, 2) invasion of privacy and maintaining confidentiality, 3) deception, 4) protection from harm, 5) data protection, and 6) managing conflicts of interest and affiliation. Violating any of these ethics can have negative consequences like jeopardizing future participation in research, damaging the reputation of the researcher and sponsor, and weakening public trust in the research process. Upholding strong ethical standards is important for conducting research responsibly and building trust.
This document discusses various topics relating to ethics in agricultural research. It begins by defining ethics and outlining the main areas of study within ethics. It then discusses ethical issues that can arise in scientific research, including research ethics frameworks like the Nuremberg Code and examples of scientific misconduct. It also addresses agricultural ethics and sustainability concerns, as well as ethics around initiating research, intellectual property rights, research administration, and guidelines for ethical behavior in scientific research. Overall, the document provides an overview of key ethical considerations that are important for conducting agricultural research.
Highlights from ExL Pharma's 4th Clinical Billing & Research ComplianceExL Pharma
This document summarizes key topics from ExL Pharma's 4th Clinical Billing & Research Compliance conference in March 2010. It discusses the distinction between regulatory misconduct and scientific misconduct in research. It also covers legal standards, investigator responsibilities, privacy regulations, clinical research billing, and technology solutions for research compliance. Hot topics included HIPAA, ARRA, genetic privacy laws, Medicare billing rules, and conflicts of interest. The document stresses the importance of education, understanding current systems and processes, and choosing integrated technology solutions to help assure research compliance.
The document discusses several key issues regarding research ethics:
1. Ethical norms in research promote goals like knowledge, truth, and cooperation between researchers. They also help ensure accountability and build public support.
2. Many professional organizations and government agencies have established codes and policies on research ethics to address issues like honesty, objectivity, integrity, and protecting human and animal subjects.
3. Researchers must make ethical decisions by carefully applying rules and considering how their actions may affect others. They should avoid misconduct but also recognize unwritten norms around attribution, conflicts of interest, and sharing information and resources.
Presentation about research and research ethicsnaribarbon
The document discusses research ethics and its principles. It outlines the objectives of ethical research which are to protect human participants, ensure research benefits society, and ensure research is ethically designed. The principles of research ethics discussed include honesty, integrity, informed consent, respect for persons, beneficence, justice and protecting privacy. Adhering to research ethics promotes trust, accountability and social values. However, research also poses limitations such as risks to participants' physical and psychological well-being. Ensuring ethics at all stages of research involves considering stakeholders, risks, responsibilities and resolving ethical issues.
Presentation about research and research ethicsnaribarbon
The document discusses research ethics and its principles. It outlines the objectives of ethical research which are to protect human participants, ensure research benefits society, and ensure research is ethically designed. The principles of research ethics discussed include honesty, integrity, informed consent, respect for persons, beneficence, justice and protecting privacy. Adhering to research ethics promotes trust, accountability and social values. However, research also poses limitations such as risks to participants' physical and psychological well-being. Ensuring ethics at all stages of research involves considering stakeholders, risks, responsibilities and resolving ethical issues.
This document discusses ethical issues related to research involving human participants. It outlines the principles of informed consent, beneficence, and justice that should guide such research. Informed consent involves providing participants with adequate information about the research, ensuring their voluntary participation, and respecting their autonomy. The principle of beneficence means maximizing benefits and minimizing harms for participants. Justice requires fair selection of participants and equitable distribution of both risks and benefits. Researchers have responsibilities to protect participants and comply with ethics requirements, while research sponsors must oversee studies and ensure local relevance.
Research ethics outlines principles to ensure research involving people is conducted safely and for the benefit of society. It requires researchers to obtain informed consent, protect privacy and confidentiality, avoid deception and harm, disclose conflicts of interest, and protect personal data. Upholding these ethical standards promotes collaborative work, accountability, and builds public trust and support for research.
This document discusses several key issues around recruiting participants for consumer perspectives research:
1. Recruitment strategies must be sensitive to the needs and characteristics of diverse populations and avoid unfair exclusion or targeting of vulnerable groups.
2. Motivating participation through compensation or other benefits requires balancing risks and undue influence, while also recognizing social and economic pressures facing potential participants.
3. A collaborative approach involving community partners and viewing participants as collaborators rather than subjects can help address issues of fairness in recruitment.
Don’t Show Me The Money" Non-Financial Conflicts of InterestIvan Oransky
This document discusses non-financial conflicts of interest in medicine and research. It notes that non-financial conflicts such as personal, political, or ideological beliefs may influence work more than financial interests alone. Examples given include disciplinary rivalries, cronyism, geographic biases, religious and political beliefs. Transparency and separation of roles are suggested to help manage some non-financial conflicts. While messy, understanding non-financial interests is still important to establish unbiased research and healthcare.
The simplified electron and muon model, Oscillating Spacetime: The Foundation...RitikBhardwaj56
Discover the Simplified Electron and Muon Model: A New Wave-Based Approach to Understanding Particles delves into a groundbreaking theory that presents electrons and muons as rotating soliton waves within oscillating spacetime. Geared towards students, researchers, and science buffs, this book breaks down complex ideas into simple explanations. It covers topics such as electron waves, temporal dynamics, and the implications of this model on particle physics. With clear illustrations and easy-to-follow explanations, readers will gain a new outlook on the universe's fundamental nature.
Conflicts of interest can arise whenever a researcher stands to gain financially or career-wise from a particular study outcome. While not inherently problematic, conflicts of interest may compromise study design, conduct, or findings if not properly disclosed. Researchers should consider how their own interests or those of sponsors align with public welfare using the six Ps framework. Journals require conflict of interest disclosures to maintain integrity and transparency, as non-disclosure can damage credibility and result in paper retraction if biases are later discovered.
Conflict of interest, Confidentiality, InformedconsentAman Ullah
This document discusses several topics related to ethics in research including conflict of interest, informed consent, and confidentiality. It defines conflict of interest as secondary interests that may distort primary research interests. Researchers have a duty to disclose conflicts to prevent harming participants or public trust. Informed consent requires fully informing participants of a study's risks, benefits and alternatives. Consent may be implied in emergencies when patients cannot consent. Confidentiality is a set of rules limiting access to private medical information, though it can be overridden if disclosure protects public health.
A conflict of interest arises whenever there is any potential bias that could affect a researcher’s work. Avoid post-publication headaches by disclosing all conflicts of interest upfront.
This document discusses the importance of research bioethics. It notes that bioethics deals with ethical issues in biomedicine and biomedical research, including research ethics, medical ethics, dental ethics, and environmental ethics. It emphasizes three core principles of ethical research: informed consent, welfare of participants, and confidentiality/anonymity of participants. The document stresses that research ethics aims to protect human subjects and ensure research is conducted safely and for the benefit of society. It also discusses the roles and responsibilities of researchers to obtain proper consent and oversight and disseminate research results in an ethical manner.
Research ethics addresses the ethical principles and values applied to research. This includes ethical treatment of human and animal subjects, preventing misuse of research results, and addressing scientific misconduct. The key principles of research ethics are respect for persons, beneficence, and justice. Respect for persons means respecting individual autonomy and protecting vulnerable populations. Beneficence means research should do no harm and maximize benefits while minimizing risks. Justice means fairness in who bears risks and benefits from research. Research ethics aims to ensure ethical and responsible conduct of research through guidelines, oversight bodies, and codes of conduct.
The document discusses conflicts of interest in health research. It defines what constitutes a conflict of interest, which can be financial interests or personal biases that could unduly influence research. It outlines different levels of conflicts of interest, from individual researchers to institutional interests. While conflicts of interest are common, they could compromise research integrity if not properly managed. The document provides examples of conflicts of interest and discusses practical steps researchers can take to avoid or mitigate conflicts, such as disclosure, transparency and independent oversight.
The document discusses ethics in medical research and provides guidelines. It discusses key concepts like informed consent, minimizing risks and protecting vulnerable groups. Research must have essentiality and voluntary participation. Conflicts of interest can occur at various levels between researchers, sponsors and participants. Guidelines aim to balance research needs with ethical standards like accountability and transparency. Informed consent requires comprehension of risks/benefits and free, voluntary choice. Utility and respect for persons are foundations for ethics in research involving humans.
The document outlines best practices for responsible and ethical scientific conduct. It discusses several key practices including intellectual honesty in proposing, performing and reporting research; accuracy in representing contributions; fairness in peer review; collegiality in scientific interactions and sharing of resources; transparency in conflicts of interest; protection of human subjects; humane care of animals; adherence to responsibilities within research teams; and mentoring and advising. The goal is to exemplify and transmit the values associated with ethical scientific conduct to maintain trust in science.
This document discusses conflict of interest issues related to a clinical drug trial called Coughgone. It provides definitions and examples of conflict of interest, noting that conflicts can arise when secondary interests like financial gain influence professional judgments meant to primarily serve patients or scientific knowledge. The document analyzes potential conflicts in the Coughgone trial, including issues with the scientific credibility of the researchers, oversight and monitoring by the review board, and financial compensation structures. It concludes by discussing ways to minimize conflicts, such as disclosure and external review processes, as well as broader issues like potential bias and reliability of publications regarding drug effectiveness.
Research methodology ethical issues in research an assignmentMaiJoy
This document discusses six key ethical considerations in research: 1) informed consent, 2) invasion of privacy and maintaining confidentiality, 3) deception, 4) protection from harm, 5) data protection, and 6) managing conflicts of interest and affiliation. Violating any of these ethics can have negative consequences like jeopardizing future participation in research, damaging the reputation of the researcher and sponsor, and weakening public trust in the research process. Upholding strong ethical standards is important for conducting research responsibly and building trust.
This document discusses various topics relating to ethics in agricultural research. It begins by defining ethics and outlining the main areas of study within ethics. It then discusses ethical issues that can arise in scientific research, including research ethics frameworks like the Nuremberg Code and examples of scientific misconduct. It also addresses agricultural ethics and sustainability concerns, as well as ethics around initiating research, intellectual property rights, research administration, and guidelines for ethical behavior in scientific research. Overall, the document provides an overview of key ethical considerations that are important for conducting agricultural research.
Highlights from ExL Pharma's 4th Clinical Billing & Research ComplianceExL Pharma
This document summarizes key topics from ExL Pharma's 4th Clinical Billing & Research Compliance conference in March 2010. It discusses the distinction between regulatory misconduct and scientific misconduct in research. It also covers legal standards, investigator responsibilities, privacy regulations, clinical research billing, and technology solutions for research compliance. Hot topics included HIPAA, ARRA, genetic privacy laws, Medicare billing rules, and conflicts of interest. The document stresses the importance of education, understanding current systems and processes, and choosing integrated technology solutions to help assure research compliance.
The document discusses several key issues regarding research ethics:
1. Ethical norms in research promote goals like knowledge, truth, and cooperation between researchers. They also help ensure accountability and build public support.
2. Many professional organizations and government agencies have established codes and policies on research ethics to address issues like honesty, objectivity, integrity, and protecting human and animal subjects.
3. Researchers must make ethical decisions by carefully applying rules and considering how their actions may affect others. They should avoid misconduct but also recognize unwritten norms around attribution, conflicts of interest, and sharing information and resources.
Presentation about research and research ethicsnaribarbon
The document discusses research ethics and its principles. It outlines the objectives of ethical research which are to protect human participants, ensure research benefits society, and ensure research is ethically designed. The principles of research ethics discussed include honesty, integrity, informed consent, respect for persons, beneficence, justice and protecting privacy. Adhering to research ethics promotes trust, accountability and social values. However, research also poses limitations such as risks to participants' physical and psychological well-being. Ensuring ethics at all stages of research involves considering stakeholders, risks, responsibilities and resolving ethical issues.
Presentation about research and research ethicsnaribarbon
The document discusses research ethics and its principles. It outlines the objectives of ethical research which are to protect human participants, ensure research benefits society, and ensure research is ethically designed. The principles of research ethics discussed include honesty, integrity, informed consent, respect for persons, beneficence, justice and protecting privacy. Adhering to research ethics promotes trust, accountability and social values. However, research also poses limitations such as risks to participants' physical and psychological well-being. Ensuring ethics at all stages of research involves considering stakeholders, risks, responsibilities and resolving ethical issues.
This document discusses ethical issues related to research involving human participants. It outlines the principles of informed consent, beneficence, and justice that should guide such research. Informed consent involves providing participants with adequate information about the research, ensuring their voluntary participation, and respecting their autonomy. The principle of beneficence means maximizing benefits and minimizing harms for participants. Justice requires fair selection of participants and equitable distribution of both risks and benefits. Researchers have responsibilities to protect participants and comply with ethics requirements, while research sponsors must oversee studies and ensure local relevance.
Research ethics outlines principles to ensure research involving people is conducted safely and for the benefit of society. It requires researchers to obtain informed consent, protect privacy and confidentiality, avoid deception and harm, disclose conflicts of interest, and protect personal data. Upholding these ethical standards promotes collaborative work, accountability, and builds public trust and support for research.
This document discusses several key issues around recruiting participants for consumer perspectives research:
1. Recruitment strategies must be sensitive to the needs and characteristics of diverse populations and avoid unfair exclusion or targeting of vulnerable groups.
2. Motivating participation through compensation or other benefits requires balancing risks and undue influence, while also recognizing social and economic pressures facing potential participants.
3. A collaborative approach involving community partners and viewing participants as collaborators rather than subjects can help address issues of fairness in recruitment.
Don’t Show Me The Money" Non-Financial Conflicts of InterestIvan Oransky
This document discusses non-financial conflicts of interest in medicine and research. It notes that non-financial conflicts such as personal, political, or ideological beliefs may influence work more than financial interests alone. Examples given include disciplinary rivalries, cronyism, geographic biases, religious and political beliefs. Transparency and separation of roles are suggested to help manage some non-financial conflicts. While messy, understanding non-financial interests is still important to establish unbiased research and healthcare.
The simplified electron and muon model, Oscillating Spacetime: The Foundation...RitikBhardwaj56
Discover the Simplified Electron and Muon Model: A New Wave-Based Approach to Understanding Particles delves into a groundbreaking theory that presents electrons and muons as rotating soliton waves within oscillating spacetime. Geared towards students, researchers, and science buffs, this book breaks down complex ideas into simple explanations. It covers topics such as electron waves, temporal dynamics, and the implications of this model on particle physics. With clear illustrations and easy-to-follow explanations, readers will gain a new outlook on the universe's fundamental nature.
Main Java[All of the Base Concepts}.docxadhitya5119
This is part 1 of my Java Learning Journey. This Contains Custom methods, classes, constructors, packages, multithreading , try- catch block, finally block and more.
Exploiting Artificial Intelligence for Empowering Researchers and Faculty, In...Dr. Vinod Kumar Kanvaria
Exploiting Artificial Intelligence for Empowering Researchers and Faculty,
International FDP on Fundamentals of Research in Social Sciences
at Integral University, Lucknow, 06.06.2024
By Dr. Vinod Kumar Kanvaria
A workshop hosted by the South African Journal of Science aimed at postgraduate students and early career researchers with little or no experience in writing and publishing journal articles.
Macroeconomics- Movie Location
This will be used as part of your Personal Professional Portfolio once graded.
Objective:
Prepare a presentation or a paper using research, basic comparative analysis, data organization and application of economic information. You will make an informed assessment of an economic climate outside of the United States to accomplish an entertainment industry objective.
A Strategic Approach: GenAI in EducationPeter Windle
Artificial Intelligence (AI) technologies such as Generative AI, Image Generators and Large Language Models have had a dramatic impact on teaching, learning and assessment over the past 18 months. The most immediate threat AI posed was to Academic Integrity with Higher Education Institutes (HEIs) focusing their efforts on combating the use of GenAI in assessment. Guidelines were developed for staff and students, policies put in place too. Innovative educators have forged paths in the use of Generative AI for teaching, learning and assessments leading to pockets of transformation springing up across HEIs, often with little or no top-down guidance, support or direction.
This Gasta posits a strategic approach to integrating AI into HEIs to prepare staff, students and the curriculum for an evolving world and workplace. We will highlight the advantages of working with these technologies beyond the realm of teaching, learning and assessment by considering prompt engineering skills, industry impact, curriculum changes, and the need for staff upskilling. In contrast, not engaging strategically with Generative AI poses risks, including falling behind peers, missed opportunities and failing to ensure our graduates remain employable. The rapid evolution of AI technologies necessitates a proactive and strategic approach if we are to remain relevant.
Assessment and Planning in Educational technology.pptxKavitha Krishnan
In an education system, it is understood that assessment is only for the students, but on the other hand, the Assessment of teachers is also an important aspect of the education system that ensures teachers are providing high-quality instruction to students. The assessment process can be used to provide feedback and support for professional development, to inform decisions about teacher retention or promotion, or to evaluate teacher effectiveness for accountability purposes.
Thinking of getting a dog? Be aware that breeds like Pit Bulls, Rottweilers, and German Shepherds can be loyal and dangerous. Proper training and socialization are crucial to preventing aggressive behaviors. Ensure safety by understanding their needs and always supervising interactions. Stay safe, and enjoy your furry friends!
A review of the growth of the Israel Genealogy Research Association Database Collection for the last 12 months. Our collection is now passed the 3 million mark and still growing. See which archives have contributed the most. See the different types of records we have, and which years have had records added. You can also see what we have for the future.
This presentation includes basic of PCOS their pathology and treatment and also Ayurveda correlation of PCOS and Ayurvedic line of treatment mentioned in classics.
Strategies for Effective Upskilling is a presentation by Chinwendu Peace in a Your Skill Boost Masterclass organisation by the Excellence Foundation for South Sudan on 08th and 09th June 2024 from 1 PM to 3 PM on each day.
it describes the bony anatomy including the femoral head , acetabulum, labrum . also discusses the capsule , ligaments . muscle that act on the hip joint and the range of motion are outlined. factors affecting hip joint stability and weight transmission through the joint are summarized.
2. Introduction
Increased involvement of academician in
research has raised potential of conflict of
Interest.
Arises from oppourtunities a faculty or other
members might have to benefit financially from
the outcome of research.
Granting agencies wants assurance from the
institution that member involved in research will
not utilise the funds to promote financial gain for
themselves or for families.
Institution should have written policies
conflict of interest
to provide a mechanism for faculty and staff
to disclose such conflicts.
3. Important aspects
The institutional Conflict of Interest policy must
include”
financial interests, gifts, gratuities and favors,
nepotism,
and other areas such as political participation
and bribery.
These rules must also indicate how outside
activities, relationships, and financial interests are
reviewed by the responsible and objective
institution official(s).
In addition, the institution has the responsibility
for maintaining objectivity in research by ensuring
that the design, conduct, or reporting of research
will not be biased by any conflicting financial
interest of investigator
4. Views
“Conflicts of interest are ubiquitous in academic life,
indeed all professional life; conflicts of interest can
never be eliminated. Moreover, the existence of
conflicts of interest has to be accepted and not
equated with scientific misconduct” (Korn 2000).
“Financial conflicts of interest are not inherent to the
research enterprise. They’re entirely optional –
unlike intellectual or personal conflicts of interest to
which they’re often compared” (Angell 2000)
5. What is a Conflict of Interest?
Situation in which the integrity of academic
activity, especially research, may be, or may be
perceived to be, compromised by financial or
other interests.
A conflict of interest occurs when a secondary
interest distorts or has the potential to distort a
judgment related to a primary interest
A professional’s judgment does not necessarily
have to be biased in order for that researcher
to have a conflict of interest — even the
appearance of a conflict of interest is ethically
worrisome
6. Primary Interests
Professionals have a primary interest—
the goal of their profession
For researchers:
− Producing generalizable knowledge
− Ensuring the safety of research
subjects
− Disseminating research results
7. Secondary Interests
Professional goals
Publishing
Obtaining future research funding
Gaining recognition and fame
Personal goals
Spending time with his/her family
Earning a good income
Other personal interests such as religion,
traveling, social activities, etc.
Political activism
8. Types
Conflicts of interest are of two major types.
Conflicts between the professional’s personal or
financial interests and the interests of a subject/
participant, patient or client, and
Conflicts that involve competing loyalties, to two
or more subjects, patients or clients.
Alternatively,
the conflict may be between a
subject/participant, client or patient and a third
party to whom the professional owes
contractual duties, for example, sponsors of
research, insurance companies, employers, etc.
The term competing interest rather than conflict of interest is preferred
by some as a way of lessening any implicit sense of misconduct
9. Financial Conflicts of Interest
The paradigm conflict of interest is financial interest.
non-financial (or only indirectly financial) forms of bias
can pose serious risks to research and to human safety
and dignity
Significant financial interests must be disclosed to
institutional officials and be appropriately managed
[Title 42 CFR, Section 50, Parts 604 and 605].
A “significant financial interest,” according to the PHS,
is one that that could directly and significantly affect the
design, conduct, or publication of research and thus
bear on issues of human subject’s protection.
The PHS sets a monetary threshold of a $10,000
interest or 5% ownership in an entity that would
reasonably be affected by research, neither PHS nor
FDA regulations specify types of financial interests that
may be held, or those that may not be held.
10. Financial interest
Financial interests include, but are not limited to:
Compensation from employment (by other than
grantee institution)
Paid consultancy, advisory board service, etc.
Stock ownership or options
Intellectual property rights (patents, copyrights,
trademarks, licensing agreements, and royalty
arrangements)
Paid expert testimony
Honoraria, speakers’ fees
Gifts
Trips
11. Ethical Concerns
I. The preservation of sound
science and
II.The protection of human subjects.
Both are integrally related.
Robust protection of human subjects –
and those who use the products of
science – depends on ensuring the
soundness of research.
12. Preservation of Sound Science
Threat to scientific integrity by introducing forms of bias
that affect the enterprise of science itself
Financial relationships among investigators,
academic research centers and private industry
create incentives to serve commercial interests
rather than the advancement of scientific knowledge
Sponsors may seek to restrict publication in order to avoid
advancing the work of competitors.
They may conceal negative study findings by maintaining control
of publication
Restricted or partial publication increases the cost of clinical
progress and can jeopardize the health of future study subjects
and future patients.
It also impedes or disrupts the work of other scientists whose
work would otherwise improve, build on or impeach prior
investigations.
13. Preservation of Sound Science
The soundness of study results can be profoundly
influenced by study design decisions: treatments to
be tested
placebo control or active control,
favorable and adverse endpoints,
the characteristics of eligible and ineligible
participants,
stopping or modifying a trial, and so on.
Without an investigator’s being aware of it,
conflicts of interest may influence the design and
conduct of research in ways that render study
results unsound, with the potential to misinform the
practice of many physicians and to affect the
health of patients
14. Preservation of Sound Science
The availability of capitation payments
fees paid by study sponsors to physicians for
each patient enrolled in a study – may decreases
interest in basic science research
may serve as an inducement for researchers and
research institutions to choose projects that are of
interest to generous sponsors rather than
alternatives that might be of more benefit to
patients or society.
15. Protection of Human Subjects
Multiple roles of clinician in clinical research leading
to compromised loyalties.
Investigators, sponsors, grantee institutions, and
physicians in private practice all stand to benefit by a
patient’s participation in research.
Enrolling sufficient number of subjects to obtain
funding, (conflict between potential subject interests and those of
investigators. )
The concern is that investigators – under pressure to
recruit – may undermine the consent process by
misrepresenting the research
inappropriately influencing patients to participate.
16. Current requirements applicable to
investigators
Before beginning a study,
Investigators
− are required to disclose financial interests
that may be affected by the outcome of
research to designated institutional
officials.
Institutions
− are required to report the existence of
conflicts of interest – but not substantive
details – to funding agencies
− to take steps to reduce, eliminate or
manage conflicts of interest.
17. Institutional Assurance
The regulations state that:
Obtain information regarding financial conflicts of
interest from all investigators according to
institutional policies and procedures.
Research institutions are formally responsible for
developing and communicating a process for
reviewing, authorizing and monitoring arrangements
that present conflicts of interest.
Investigators are advised to ensure compliance with
all of their institution’s policies relating to conflicts of
interest .
Improperly managed conflicts of interest can result
in suspending funding to the offending grantee.
18. Impact of the 2003 Guidance on
current requirements
On March 31, 2003, the Department of Health
and Human Services (DHHS) published revised
“draft guidance”Financial Relationships and
Interests in Research Involving Human
Subjects: Guidance for Human Subject
Protection”
The 2003 guidance defines a “conflicting financial
interest” as “a financial interest related to a
research study that will, or may reasonably be
expected to create a bias.” It continues to rely on
institutional assurance rather than prescription.
19. Managing Conflict of Interest
The 2003 Guidance states: “financial interests may
be managed by eliminating them or mitigating their
potentially negative impact.”
The primary strategies for managing conflicts of
interest are disclosure and prohibition.
A number of influential professional societies,
researchers and institutions have advocated a total
ban on paid consultancies and equity holdings in
entities related to their research; some have
recommended barring investigators from
investments in fields in which they are conducting
research.
20. Managing Conflict of Interest
peer review of the study design
independent oversight of the research
insulating investigator from knowledge about
the impact of financial interests through blind-
trust type devices
insulating the subject/participant from the
influence of financial considerations on
professional judgment by having an
investigator with a conflict abstain from
problematic aspects of the study
disclosure of the financial interest to subjects
on the consent form
21. Managing Conflict of Interest
Acknowledge that some conflicts exist (or may
exist) and must be “managed”
Prevent some relationships
Those of no scientific, academic value
Those for which the conflict is deemed “too great”
Those for which the faculty member has been “irresponsible”,
unethical, unprofessional
Manage those relationships that are determined to be
appropriate/worthwhile to minimize the conflict
Clarify what constitutes a Conflict of Interest
22. Managing Conflicts of Interest
Prohibiting Problematic financial
interest
Eliminate those actions that have inherent
conflicts without obvious benefit
Free gifts, meals, junkets
Equity holding
Drug samples
Conflict free formulary committees
Industry control of educational programs
Speakers bureaus
Consultation relationships and research funding
DRAFT - For discussion purposes only
23. Managing Conflict of Interest
Academic implication
Ensure transparency to all stakeholders
Specify deliverables in all relationships
with industry
Research funding
Consulting agreements
Publication and dissemination of
information (positive and negative)
Intellectual property
24. Managing Conflict of Interest
Implications for Patient Care
Clarify relationships to patients
Informed consent
Role of industry in decisionmaking and
clinical management
Consider participation by Ombudsman
Transfer decision making or care, as
appropriate
25. Conclusion:
How should conflicts of interest be
dealt with?
Several options exist; all require
identifying COIs!
Eliminating conflict
Disclosing conflict (e.g., to participants, to
colleagues or superior)
Introducing intermediaries (e.g., consent
monitor)
What other approaches might be
sensible?
26. Scientific misconduct
It is the violation of the standard codes of scholarly
conduct and ethical behavior in professional
scientific research. The main forms of scientific
misconduct are:
fabrication – the publication of deliberately
false or misleading research, often subdivided
in:
fabrication – v-the actual making up of
research data and (the intent of) publishing
them
falsification – manipulation of research data
and processes or omitting critical data or
results
plagiarism – the act of taking credit (or
attempting to take credit) for the work of
another.
27. Motivation to commit scientific
misconduct
Career pressure
"publish or perish"
Believing that one "knows the right answer"
intend to introduce a fact that they believe is
true, without actually performing the
experiments required.
The ability to get away with it
Consequences:
vary based on the severity of the fraud, the level of
notice it receives, and how long it goes undetected.
Even a case of plagiarism can cause damage through
resources being misdirected to others who may be less
capable of using them effectively and certainly are less
deserving of them.
28. Suppression/non-publication of data
Studies may be suppressed or remain unpublished
because
the findings are perceived to undermine the
commercial, political or other interests of the
sponsoring agent
they fail to support the ideological goals of the
researcher.
It may be possible in some cases to use statistical
methods to show that the datasets offered in relation to a
given field are incomplete
Some cases go beyond the failure to publish complete
reports of all findings with researchers knowingly making
false claims based on falsified data.
29. Responsibility of authors and of
coauthors
All authors, including coauthors, are expected to have
made reasonable attempts to check findings submitted
to academic journals for publication
Simultaneous submission of scientific findings to more
than one journal or duplicate publication of findings is
usually regarded as misconduct, under what is known
as the Ingelfinger rule.
Guest authorship and ghost authorship ( are
commonly regarded as forms of research misconduct
Authors are expected to keep all study data for later
examination even after publication
to provide information about ethical aspects of research
Provision of incorrect information to journals may be
regarded as misconduct
30. Summary
Increased involvement of academic researchers has
raised the potential for Conflict of Interest (CoI).
Professionals have a conflict of interest when their
interests or commitments
compromise their judgments,
compromise their research reports.
compromise their communications to research
subjects, participants, patients, or clients.
Multiple role of clinician has led to compromised
loyalties
Human subject recruitment in industry-sponsored trials
conflicts with the fiduciary role.
Investigators, sponsors, grantee institutions, and
physicians in private practice all stand to benefit by a
patient’s participation in research.
31. Summary
Before beginning a study, investigators are required
to disclose financial interests that may be affected by
the outcome of research
Institutions are required to report the existence of
conflicts of interest – but not substantive details – to
funding agencies and to take steps to reduce,
eliminate or manage conflicts of interest.
The goal of managing conflicts of interest is to
minimize the extent to which the design and conduct
of research is influenced – consciously or
unconsciously – by financial considerations
Scientific misconduct is the violation of the standard
codes of scholarly conduct and ethical behavior in
professional scientific research.