This discussion activity is intended to warm up attendees at a professional development event about Human Research Ethics. This is to encourage a reflection on how different groups regard research participants. There are no right answers, the objective is to get people talking and reflecting on Human Research Ethics matters. It is also an opportunity to reflect upon matters such as paternity in decision making, showing respect and conflicts of interests.
This Human Research Ethics commentary reflects on useful approaches to researchers who fail to respond to requests. This includes failure to respond to research ethics review feedback, failure to respond to requests for ethical conduct reports and failure to respond to other requests from the research ethics committee. Hopefully, your institutional approach will be a little bit more practical than the Goldberg machine in this humorous Don Mayne cartoon.
This discussion sheet is about the ethical reflections associated with the screening of a potential participant pool and the exclusion of some individuals.
The role and recognition of advisers/technicians/assistants in human research – A Human Research Ethics commentary
A commentary sheet about the appropriate role and recognition of advisers/technicians/assistants in human research and the way in which they are acknowledged. This includes the degree to which they are delegated disclosing uncomfortable or scary information to new participants.
A commentary sheet about the use of blinding in clinical trials and trials that are too successful, with deleterious consequences. Based upon a humous Don Mayne cartoon, published to our Friday Arvo Funnies page. A useful commentary for discussion in professional development activities/resources about blinding and clinical trials.
Human research ethics and risk, the role of research ethics committees – A Human Research Ethics talk
This is a recording of a Victoria Ethics Network session facilitated by Prof. Nik Zeps, a senior consultant of AHRECS. He is speaking about the role of HRECs with regard to risks, benefits and their weighing. A very handy one hour ten minute talk by an experienced practitioner, who has both served on the committee that drafted the National Statement on Ethical Conduct in Human Research and has served/chaired numerous research ethics committees.
Watch out the robots are coming. While this Don Mayne may have you worried about the future of research as AI and robotics advance, this Kevin Roose TED Talk suggests there is a future for humans as long as we maximise the humanity in our work.
Vulnerability, research ethics review and the review of s4 of the National Statement – A Human Research Ethics talk by Gary Allen and Mandy Downing
How we approach vulnerability can empower and respect individuals or compound their isolation and discrimination they face. In this 11 minute talk by Dr Gary Allen and spoken by Mandy Downing. This talk was sponsored by QUT as part of its HREC professional development and the Committe’s active engagement with the National Statement.