The publication of the research governance frameworks for health and community/social care since 2001 has provided a guideline of standards and accountability for the conduct of research and research-related activity that applies to both health and community/social care contexts. The frameworks are also offered as models of governance to be used by non-governmental organisations involved in research activity in health and social care. This paper outlines the College of Occupational Therapists' arrangements for ethical review of its own research and related activity.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AbbasiK (2005) Ethics review of research and audit: Journals should not abdicate their responsibility. (Editorial.)British Medical Journal, 330(7489), 431–32.
2.
Association of Directors of Social Services (2005) Ethics review of social care research. Response of the ADSS to the public consultation. London: Association of Directors of Social Services. Available at: http://www.adss.org.uk/publications/consresp/2004/ethics.shtml Accessed on 25.07.05.
BellinEDublerNN (2001) The quality improvement-research divide and the need for external oversight. American Journal of Public Health, 91(9), 1512–17.
5.
BennP (1998) Ethics. London: UCL Press.
6.
BoazA (2002) Department of Health consultation on research ethics in social care: A summary of the consultation event with social care service users and their representatives. Eastleigh, Hampshire: INVOLVE.
7.
BoazA (2003) Department of Health consultation on research ethics in social care: A summary of the follow up consultation event with social care service users and their representatives. Eastleigh, Hampshire: INVOLVE.
Department of Health (2001) Governance arrangements for NHS research ethics committees. London: DH.
15.
Department of Health (2005) Report of the Ad Hoc Advisory Group on the Operation of NHS Research Ethics Committees. London: DH.
16.
DoyalL (1997) Informed consent in medical research. Journals should not publish research to which patients have not given fully informed consent — with three exceptions. British Medical Journal, 314(7087), 1107.
17.
DoyalL (2004) Preserving moral quality in research, audit, and quality improvement. Quality and Safety in Health Care, 13(1), 11–12.
18.
HareRM (1994) Utilitarianism and deontological principles. In: GillonR, ed. Principles of health care ethics. Chichester: John Wiley, 149–57.
19.
INVOLVE (2004) Ethics review in social care research: Option appraisal and Guidelines by Jan Pahl: A response from INVOLVE. Eastleigh, Hampshire: INVOLVE.
20.
Joseph Rowntree Foundation (2005) Research as empowerment?York: Joseph Rowntree Foundation.
21.
Low-BeerTS (2001) Ethics committee review of medical audit: A personal view from the United Kingdom. Sexually Transmitted Infections, 77(1), 72.
22.
LynnJ (2004) When does quality improvement count as research? Human subject protection and theories of knowledge. Quality and Safety in Health Care, 13(1), 67–70.
NHS Research and Development Forum Research Governance Working Group (2003) Examples of good practice: Research governance monitoring and auditing. London: Department of Health. Available at: http://www.rdforum.nhs.uk/workgroups/rg/monitoring_0703.doc Accessed on 27.07.05.
PerengerTV (2004) Why we need ethical oversight of quality improvement projects. (Editorial.)International Journal for Quality in Health Care, 15(5), 343–44.
28.
Research Forum for Allied Health Professions (2004) Minutes of a meeting of the Research Forum for Allied Health Professions held on 7 December 2004. Item 4. (Unpublished.) Reported in: Occupational Therapy News, 13(2), 15.
29.
SmythMWilliamsonE, eds (2004) Researchers and their ‘subjects’: Ethics, power, knowledge and consent. Bristol: Policy Press.
30.
TalbotM (2001) Ethics committee review of medical audit: A personal view from the United Kingdom. Sexually Transmitted Infections, 77(1), 69–71.
31.
WadeDT (2005) Ethics, audit, and research: All shades of grey. British Medical Journal, 330(7489), 468–71.
32.
Working Group on Ethical Review of Student Research in the NHS (2004) The ethical governance and regulation of student projects: A draft proposal. London: Central Office for Research Ethics Committees. Available at: http://www.corec.org.uk/recs/docs/SPECs_proposal_DRAFT.doc Accessed on 27.07.05.
