Research ethics committees: values and power in higher education

The rise of research governance structures in universities has created huge disquiet amongst academic researchers. The unquestioning adoption of a medical model of ethical review based upon positivist methodological assumptions has created for many a mismatch between their own ongoing ethical research practice and the process of obtaining clearance from Research Ethics Committees (REC). This paper examines the issues that have contributed to dissatisfaction with the ethical review model that is prevalent within the modern university. Using examples from the authors’ own experiences, the dynamics of values, interests and power in research governance is examined from multiple perspectives including that of REC member and applicant; lecturer/student supervisor; researcher; and
university administrator. The paper reveals a rift between the values and objectives of the key players in research governance within the modern university and concludes by asking whether differences can be resolved so that a collaborative approach to ethical review may be incorporated into a renewed academic research culture. It is suggested that the alternative is increasing alienation from anything to do with ‘ethics’, with potentially serious consequences for the ethical standards of social research.

Cystic fibrosis research in allied health and nursing professions

This report is the result of the "Allied Health and Nursing Professions Working Group" meeting which took place in Verona, Italy, November 2009, which was organised by the European Cystic Fibrosis Society, and involved 32 experts. The meeting was designed to provide a "roadmap" of high priority research questions that can be addressed by Allied Health Professionals (AHP) and nursing. The other goal was to identify research skills that would be beneficial to AHP and nursing researchers and would ultimately improve the research capacity and capability of these professions. The following tasks were accomplished: 1) a Delphi survey was used to identify high priority research areas and themes, 2) common research designs used in AHP and nursing research were evaluated in terms of their strengths and weaknesses, 3) methods for assessing the clinimetric and psychometric properties, as well as feasibility, of relevant outcome measures were reviewed, and 4) a common skill set for AHPs and nurses undertaking clinical research was agreed on and will guide the planning of future research opportunities. This report has identified important areas and themes for future research which include: adherence; physical activity/exercise; nutritional interventions; interventions for the newborn with CF and evaluation of outcome measures for use in AHP and nursing research. It has highlighted the significant challenges AHPs and nurses experience in conducting clinical research, and proposes strategies to overcome these challenges. It is hoped that this report will encourage research initiatives that assess the efficacy/effectiveness of AHP and nursing interventions in order to improve the evidence base. This should increase the quality of research conducted by these professions, justify services they currently provide, and expand their skills in new areas, with the ultimate goal of improving care for patients with CF.