Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28691559›Full record

ArticleJournal of empirical research on human research ethics : JERHRE2017

Ethics and Science in the Participatory Era: A Vignette-Based Delphi Study.

Elizabeth Bromley, Lisa Mikesell, Dmitry Khodyakov

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of empirical research on human research ethics : JERHRE, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Elizabeth Bromley1 University of California, Los Angeles, CA, USA.
Lisa Mikesell3 Rutgers University, New Brunswick, NJ, USA.
Dmitry Khodyakov4 The RAND Corporation, Santa Monica, CA, USA.

Funding

The Impact of Partnerships with Community on Research IntegrityR21ES022093 · NIEHS · RAND CORPORATION · PI BROMLEY, ELIZABETH A, KHODYAKOV, DMITRY · 2012 to 2013
$451k
NIEHS NIH HHS R21 ES022093
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Participatory researchers rely on relationship-based ethical considerations to address ethical challenges, but little is known about how these considerations shape day-to-day decision-making. We presented vignettes describing ethical dilemmas to health researchers with varying degrees of experience in participatory research in an online modified-Delphi panel. Panelists rated potential solutions to dilemmas and provided rationales for choosing solutions in text boxes and discussion boards. Panelists agreed on a preferred solution for three of five vignettes. Panelists indicated that ethical research decision-making should be inclusive of diverse perspectives. Panelists prioritized scientific goals above participatory ones and viewed tenets of scientific validity as value-free. Panelists indicated that participatory research ethics would be difficult to codify, but that vignette-based learning could support didactic objectives.

Indexed as

Attitude of Health PersonnelCommunity ParticipationDecision MakingEthics, ResearchResearchCommunity-Based Participatory ResearchDelphi TechniqueHumansProblem-Based LearningResearch PersonnelSciencemodified-Delphi panelparticipatory researchresearch ethicsvignette research

Identifiers

PMID28691559
PMCPMC5690864

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.