SynthesisScience and engineering ethics2017
What Do Ethical Guidelines for Epidemiology Say About an Ethics Review? A Qualitative Systematic Review.
Synthesis in Science and engineering ethics, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
12 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Barriers towards deceased organ donation among Indians living globally: an integrative systematic review using narrative synthesis.BMJ open · 2022Pooled it
- Practices for collecting, analyzing and disseminating data on health and its social determinants among Black populations in Quebec: a scoping review.Health promotion and chronic disease prevention in Canada : research, policy and practice · 2025Article
- Heterogeneity of Fatigue in Patients with Chronic Heart Failure: Latent Categories and Influencing Factors.International journal of general medicine · 2025Article
- The relationship between cancer-related fatigue, quality of life and pain among cancer patients.International journal of nursing sciences · 2023Article
- A scoping review of guidelines for the use of race, ethnicity, and ancestry reveals widespread consensus but also points of ongoing disagreement.American journal of human genetics · 2022Article
- Towards an appropriate ethics framework for Health and Demographic Surveillance Systems (HDSS): learning from issues faced in diverse HDSS in sub-Saharan Africa.BMJ global health · 2021Article
- Bridging research integrity and global health epidemiology (BRIDGE) guidelines: explanation and elaboration.BMJ global health · 2020Review
- A Review of Online Dyslexia Learning Modules.Frontiers in education · 2020Article
- Health of Syrian unaccompanied asylum seeking adolescents (UASA) at first medical examination in Germany in comparison to UASA from other world regions.BMC international health and human rights · 2019Article
- Need for Controlling of the Filter Bubble Effect.Science and engineering ethics · 2019Article
- Article
- Google Search as an Additional Source in Systematic Reviews.Science and engineering ethics · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Epidemiological research is subject to an ethics review. The aim of this qualitative review is to compare existing ethical guidelines in English for epidemiological research and public health practice in regard to the scope and matter of an ethics review. Authors systematically searched PubMed, Google Scholar and Google Search for ethical guidelines. Qualitative analysis (constant comparative method) was applied to categorize important aspects of the an ethics review process. Eight ethical guidelines in English for epidemiological research were retrieved. Five main categories that are relevant to the review of epidemiological research by Institutional Review Boards/Research Ethics Committees were distinguished. Within the scope of main categories, fifty-nine subcategories were analyzed. There are important differences between the guidelines in terms of the scope and matter of an ethics review. Not all guidelines encompass all identified ethically important issues, and some do not define precisely the scope and matter of an ethics review, leaving much to the ethics of the individual researchers and the discretion of IRBs/RECs.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.