NR 505 Week 6 DQ How has learning about the history of research ethics impacted your view of biomedical research?

NR 505 Week 6 DQ How has learning about the history of research ethics impacted your view of biomedical research?

NR 505 Week 6 DQ How has learning about the history of research ethics impacted your view of biomedical research?

• 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 (SEPSIS), do you feel that today’s researchers adequately protect the rights of human subjects? If not, what additional measures do you recommend?

NR 505 Week 6 DQ How has learning about the history of research ethics impacted your view of biomedical research? Sample

1. How has learning about the history of research ethics impacted your view of biomedical research?

Learning about the history of research ethics has significantly transformed my knowledge of the thresholds for safeguarding the rights of human subjects when conducting biomedical research. Before delving into an in-depth discussion about the importance of learning about research ethics, it is essential to reflect on various historical events that necessitated integrating ethical considerations and standards into biomedical research. According to Das & Sil (2017), milestones in the evolution of ethics for clinical research include historical events such as the Nazi war experiments (1939-45), the Nuremberg code (1946), the Wilbrook Hepatitis study (1956), the Declaration of Helsinki (1964), the Tuskegee Syphilis Study (1932-72), and the Belmont report of 1979. The common theme of these events is the establishment of ethical standards and guidelines for biomedical research.

ORDER A PLAGIARISM-FREE PAPER HERE ON;NR 505 Week 6 DQ How has learning about the history of research ethics impacted your view of biomedical research?

For instance, the Belmont report (1979) brought about the need to uphold the four bioethical principles: beneficence, non-maleficence, autonomy, and justice. Favaretto et al. (2020) contend that this report and the Declaration of Helsinki require researchers to minimize the harm to research participants, ensure that the research is of benefit to the participants, obtain informed consent, demonstrate transparency and openness when sharing information on research methods, and safeguard participants’ privacy and anonymity. Further, these guidelines require researchers to ensure fair treatment for research participants during the recruitment and data collection phases.

As a nursing student, I am responsible for adhering to the ethical standards for biomedical research. For instance, I must consider a research study’s potential benefits and burdens, participants’ socioeconomic and demographic diversities, and the subjects’ autonomy to influence research trajectories. Also, I am responsible for obtaining informed consent, safeguarding participants’ privacy and anonymity, and ensuring proper information sharing regarding research methods. Finally, it is vital to avoid deceptive strategies for coercing or tricking the participants into participating in the research. Therefore, learning the history of research ethics has profoundly enhanced my knowledge and awareness of the minimum thresholds for conducting research that involves human subjects.

2. In looking at the studies your 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?

The selected qualitative, quantitative, and mixed-methods studies regarding sepsis management demonstrated a reputable level in upholding ethical standards for bioethical research. For instance, researchers explained their inclusion criteria, obtained informed consent, and sought permission from different research committees. However, researchers did not effectively describe the procedures for ensuring data privacy and participants’ anonymity when involving digital methods for collecting data, including online surveys. Another challenge facing current researchers is the confusion between blinding and the ethics of openness in sharing information regarding research methods. In this sense, researchers face the need to establish the consensus between the need to blind participants and the requirement for disclosing information to them.

Based on these ethical challenges, I recommend researchers to focus on the four bioethical principles: beneficence, non-maleficence, autonomy, and justice. The principles of charity and non-maleficence entail ensuring that the research benefits participants and the process of minimizing harm. On the other hand, autonomy and justice strictly emphasize the fair treatment of participants, obtaining informed consent, ensuring transparency when disclosing information to research subjects, and empowering them to influence research by considering their values, opinions, and feedback.

References

Das, N., & Sil, A. (2017). Evolution of ethics in clinical research and ethics committee. Indian Journal of Dermatology, 62(4), 373–379. https://doi.org/10.4103/ijd.ijd_271_17

Favaretto, M., De Clercq, E., Gaab, J., & Elger, B. S. (2020). First do no harm: An exploration of researchers’ ethics of conduct in big data behavioral studies. PLOS ONE, 15(11), e0241865. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0241865