Out of the frying pan? Streamlining the ethics review process of multisite qualitative research projects

Iedema, RAM; Allen, S; Britton, K; Hor, S

Out of the frying pan? Streamlining the ethics review process of multisite qualitative research projects

Iedema, RAM

Allen, S Britton, K Hor, S

Permalink

Publication Type:: Journal Article
Citation:: Australian Health Review, 2013, 37 (2), pp. 137 - 139
Issue Date:: 2013-04-16

Closed Access

	Filename	Description	Size
	2012004082OK.pdf		127.57 kB	Adobe PDF	View/Open

Copyright Clearance Process

Recently Added
In Progress
Closed Access

This item is closed access and not available.

Full metadata record

Field	Value	Language
dc.contributor.author	Iedema, RAM https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6792-1048	en_US
dc.contributor.author	Allen, S	en_US
dc.contributor.author	Britton, K	en_US
dc.contributor.author	Hor, S https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6498-9722	en_US
dc.date.available	2012-07-26	en_US
dc.date.issued	2013-04-16	en_US
dc.identifier.citation	Australian Health Review, 2013, 37 (2), pp. 137 - 139	en_US
dc.identifier.issn	0156-5788	en_US
dc.identifier.uri	http://hdl.handle.net/10453/28688
dc.description.abstract	This paper describes the ethics approval processes for two multicentre, nationwide, qualitative health service research projects. The paper explains that the advent of the National Ethics Application Form has brought many improvements, but that attendant processes put in place at local health network and Human Research Ethics Committee levels may have become significantly more complicated, particularly for innovative qualitative research projects. The paper raises several questions based on its analysis of ethics application processes currently in place. What is known about the topic? The complexity of multicentre research ethics applications for research in health services has been addressed by the introduction of the National Ethics Application Form. Uptake of the form across the country's human research ethics committees has been uneven. What does this paper add? This paper adds detailed insight into the ethics application process as it is currently enacted across the country. The paper details this process with reference to difficulties faced by multisite and qualitative studies in negotiating access to research sites, ethics committees' relative unfamiliarity with qualitative research, and apparent tensions between harmonisation and local sites' autonomy in approving research. What are the implications for practitioners? Practitioners aiming to engage in research need to be aware that ethics approval takes place in an uneven procedural landscape, made up of variable levels of ethics approval harmonisation and intricate governance or site-specific assessment processes. © AHHA 2013.	en_US
dc.relation.ispartof	Australian Health Review	en_US
dc.relation.isbasedon	10.1071/AH11044	en_US
dc.subject.classification	Health Policy & Services	en_US
dc.subject.mesh	Humans	en_US
dc.subject.mesh	Pilot Projects	en_US
dc.subject.mesh	Qualitative Research	en_US
dc.subject.mesh	Ethics Consultation	en_US
dc.subject.mesh	New South Wales	en_US
dc.subject.mesh	Multicenter Studies as Topic	en_US
dc.title	Out of the frying pan? Streamlining the ethics review process of multisite qualitative research projects	en_US
dc.type	Journal Article
utslib.citation.volume	2	en_US
utslib.citation.volume	37	en_US
utslib.for	1199 Other Medical and Health Sciences	en_US
pubs.embargo.period	Not known	en_US
pubs.organisational-group	/University of Technology Sydney
pubs.organisational-group	/University of Technology Sydney/Faculty of Arts and Social Sciences
pubs.organisational-group	/University of Technology Sydney/Faculty of Arts and Social Sciences/Communication & Learning Group
pubs.organisational-group	/University of Technology Sydney/Faculty of Health
utslib.copyright.status	closed_access
pubs.issue	2	en_US
pubs.publication-status	Published	en_US
pubs.volume	37	en_US

Abstract:

This paper describes the ethics approval processes for two multicentre, nationwide, qualitative health service research projects. The paper explains that the advent of the National Ethics Application Form has brought many improvements, but that attendant processes put in place at local health network and Human Research Ethics Committee levels may have become significantly more complicated, particularly for innovative qualitative research projects. The paper raises several questions based on its analysis of ethics application processes currently in place. What is known about the topic? The complexity of multicentre research ethics applications for research in health services has been addressed by the introduction of the National Ethics Application Form. Uptake of the form across the country's human research ethics committees has been uneven. What does this paper add? This paper adds detailed insight into the ethics application process as it is currently enacted across the country. The paper details this process with reference to difficulties faced by multisite and qualitative studies in negotiating access to research sites, ethics committees' relative unfamiliarity with qualitative research, and apparent tensions between harmonisation and local sites' autonomy in approving research. What are the implications for practitioners? Practitioners aiming to engage in research need to be aware that ethics approval takes place in an uneven procedural landscape, made up of variable levels of ethics approval harmonisation and intricate governance or site-specific assessment processes. © AHHA 2013.

Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:

http://hdl.handle.net/10453/28688