NR 505 Week 6 Overview: Research Ethics Paper
NR 505 Week 6 Overview: Research Ethics Paper
How has learning about the history of research ethics impacted your view of biomedical research?
In looking at the studies you reviewed for your PICOT question, do you feel that todays researchers adequately protect the rights of human subjects? If not, what additional measures do you recommend?
• PICOT attached on Sepsis
ORDER A CUSTOMIZED, PLAGIARISM-FREE PAPER HERE
Good News For Our New customers . We can write this assignment for you and pay after Delivery. Our Top -rated medical writers will comprehensively review instructions , synthesis external evidence sources(Scholarly) and customize a quality assignment for you. We will also attach a copy of plagiarism report alongside and AI report. Feel free to chat Us
NR 505 Week 6 Overview: Research Ethics Sample
How has learning about the history of research ethics impacted your view of biomedical research?
As a nursing student, I should advance my knowledge and awareness of evidence-based practice components, including clinical research tenets. It is essential to note that nursing researchers are morally and legally responsible for adhering to the international ethical codes for nursing research and clinical practice. Varkey (2021) defines ethics as an “inherent and inseparable part of clinical medicine as the physician has an ethical obligation to benefit the patient, to avoid or minimize harm, and to respect the values and preferences of the patient” (p. 17). In nursing research, researchers must adhere to the four profound ethical principles; beneficence, non-maleficence, autonomy, and justice through informed consent, truth-telling, and confidentiality.
The history of research ethics provides a chronological order of events that shaped and influenced the integration of ethical considerations and standards when involving human subjects in clinical research. Das & Sil (2017) present various historical events involving gross human rights violations, prompting multi-agency commitment to develop and implement ethical standards for nursing research. Examples of these events include Nazi war experiments of 1939 to 1945, the Wibrook Hepatitis study of 1956, and the Tuskegee Syphilis Study (1932-1972). The common themes of these historical events are a culture of overlooking human rights during research activities, deceptive practices and behaviors such as intentions to conceal research information, and the long-term effects of unethical research trials, including deaths and disabilities.
Undeniably, learning about these historical events and the chronological development of nursing research ethics impacted my knowledge and awareness of ethical standards for nursing research. As a researcher, learning about the history of research equipped me with knowledge and competencies for safeguarding participants’ confidentiality and privacy, obtaining informed consent, and avoiding deceptive practices like coercing or tricking the target population into participating in research practices. Also, these events helped me to understand the potential adverse consequences of unethical research trials involving human subjects. Consequently, I can effectively integrate ethical standards into nursing research practices.
ORDER A CUSTOMIZED, PLAGIARISM-FREE PAPER HERE
In looking at the studies reviewed for your PICOT question, do you feel that today’s researchers adequately protect the rights of human subjects? If not, what additional measures do you recommend?
While analyzing my PICOT question about early sepsis screening and management, I reviewed various qualitative, quantitative, and mixed-methods studies that provided insights into the topic by providing findings from different contexts and research settings. I realized that some of these studies effectively incorporate ethical standards by explaining the inclusion criteria to participants, obtaining informed consent, ensuring participants’ anonymity and confidentiality, using straightforward measures for collecting data, and seeking permission from research committees. However, I realized that researchers violated participants’ right to access information by blinding and concealing information for randomization. Although blinding participants is a profound strategy for preventing biases and improving the statistical significance of research findings, it may violate participants’ right to information access. Therefore, I would recommend researchers adopt partial blinding approaches to establish the balance between blinding and the ethical obligation of openness in sharing information. Won et al. (2022) argue that successful blinding in randomized clinical trials (RCTs) improves results’ credibility and accuracy by eliminating biases and perceptions. However, researchers should uphold the current standard of providing full disclosure (FD) during the informed consent process in RCTs.
References
Das, N., & Sil, A. (2017). Evolution of ethics in clinical research and ethics committee. Indian Journal of Dermatology, 62(4), 373. https://doi.org/10.4103/ijd.ijd_271_17
Varkey, B. (2021). Principles of clinical ethics and their application to practice. Medical Principles and Practice, 30(1), 17–28. https://doi.org/10.1159/000509119
Won, J., Bang, H., & Lee, H. (2022). Effect of partial vs. full disclosure of potential assignment to placebo on participant blinding, perceptions of group assignment, and trial outcomes. JAMA Network Open, 5(3), e224050. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2022.4050
