How to embed ethics into laboratory research.

IF 2.8 1区 哲学 Q1 MEDICAL ETHICS Accountability in Research-Policies and Quality Assurance Pub Date : 2024-10-01 Epub Date: 2023-01-17 DOI:10.1080/08989621.2023.2165916
Paola Buedo, Idalina Odziemczyk, Jolanta Perek-Białas, Marcin Waligora
{"title":"How to embed ethics into laboratory research.","authors":"Paola Buedo, Idalina Odziemczyk, Jolanta Perek-Białas, Marcin Waligora","doi":"10.1080/08989621.2023.2165916","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Health-related innovation in biotechnology requires anticipating potential bioethical implications. In this article, we present a strategy to embed ethics in a group of early-stage researchers performing research in gene therapy and regenerative medicine in the laboratory phase. We conducted a series of focus group meetings with early-stage researchers who work in biotechnology laboratories. The objective was to reflect on the bioethical challenges of their own work and to promote the integration of research ethics with laboratory practice. The activity was assessed with questionnaires completed by the researchers before and after the meetings, and the analyses of the focus groups' content. As a result of the focus group series, all participants changed their perspectives about ethical issues regarding their planned research, developed the ability to reflect and debate on research ethics and had increased awareness of ethical issues in their own research activities. Half of them made changes in their research work. The study provides a concrete strategy to embed ethics and to strengthen responsibility in laboratory research. It is a strategy that allows to perform ethics reflection \"on site\" and in \"real time\" and complements the classic strategy of ethics assessment of the research protocol before starting the research procedure.</p>","PeriodicalId":50927,"journal":{"name":"Accountability in Research-Policies and Quality Assurance","volume":" ","pages":"767-785"},"PeriodicalIF":2.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10835673/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Accountability in Research-Policies and Quality Assurance","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/08989621.2023.2165916","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/1/17 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MEDICAL ETHICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Health-related innovation in biotechnology requires anticipating potential bioethical implications. In this article, we present a strategy to embed ethics in a group of early-stage researchers performing research in gene therapy and regenerative medicine in the laboratory phase. We conducted a series of focus group meetings with early-stage researchers who work in biotechnology laboratories. The objective was to reflect on the bioethical challenges of their own work and to promote the integration of research ethics with laboratory practice. The activity was assessed with questionnaires completed by the researchers before and after the meetings, and the analyses of the focus groups' content. As a result of the focus group series, all participants changed their perspectives about ethical issues regarding their planned research, developed the ability to reflect and debate on research ethics and had increased awareness of ethical issues in their own research activities. Half of them made changes in their research work. The study provides a concrete strategy to embed ethics and to strengthen responsibility in laboratory research. It is a strategy that allows to perform ethics reflection "on site" and in "real time" and complements the classic strategy of ethics assessment of the research protocol before starting the research procedure.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
如何将伦理融入实验室研究。
生物技术中与健康有关的创新需要预见潜在的生物伦理影响。在这篇文章中,我们提出了一种策略,将伦理问题纳入到一群在实验室阶段从事基因治疗和再生医学研究的早期研究人员中。我们与在生物技术实验室工作的早期研究人员举行了一系列焦点小组会议。目的是反思他们自身工作所面临的生物伦理挑战,促进研究伦理与实验室实践的结合。通过研究人员在会议前后填写的调查问卷以及对焦点小组内容的分析,对活动进行了评估。焦点小组系列活动的结果是,所有参与者都改变了对与其计划的研究有关的伦理问题的看法,提高了对研究伦理进行反思和辩论的能力,并增强了对自身研究活动中的伦理问题的认识。半数参与者对自己的研究工作进行了调整。这项研究为在实验室研究中植入伦理和加强责任提供了一个具体的策略。这是一种可以 "现场 "和 "实时 "进行伦理反思的策略,是对研究程序开始前对研究方案进行伦理评估这一传统策略的补充。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.90
自引率
14.70%
发文量
49
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: Accountability in Research: Policies and Quality Assurance is devoted to the examination and critical analysis of systems for maximizing integrity in the conduct of research. It provides an interdisciplinary, international forum for the development of ethics, procedures, standards policies, and concepts to encourage the ethical conduct of research and to enhance the validity of research results. The journal welcomes views on advancing the integrity of research in the fields of general and multidisciplinary sciences, medicine, law, economics, statistics, management studies, public policy, politics, sociology, history, psychology, philosophy, ethics, and information science. All submitted manuscripts are subject to initial appraisal by the Editor, and if found suitable for further consideration, to peer review by independent, anonymous expert referees.
期刊最新文献
Procrastination and inconsistency: Expressions of concern for publications with compromised integrity. A policy toolkit for authorship and dissemination policies may benefit NIH research consortia. A randomized trial alerting authors, with or without coauthors or editors, that research they cited in systematic reviews and guidelines has been retracted. Citation bias, diversity, and ethics. Industry effects on evidence: a case study of long-acting injectable antipsychotics.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1