Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29070032›Full record

ArticleBMC medical ethics2017

Collaborative partnership and the social value of clinical research: a qualitative secondary analysis.

Sanna-Maria Nurmi, Arja Halkoaho, Mari Kangasniemi, Anna-Maija Pietilä

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC medical ethics, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing 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

7 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. 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

4 authors.

Sanna-Maria NurmiDepartment of Nursing Science, University of Eastern Finland, Kuopio Campus, P.O. Box 1627, 70211, Kuopio, Finland. sannu@student.uef.fi.
Arja HalkoahoKuopio University Hospital (Science Service Centre), P.O. Box 100, FI 70029 KYS, Kuopio, Finland.
Mari KangasniemiDepartment of Nursing Science, University of Eastern Finland, Kuopio Campus, P.O. Box 1627, 70211, Kuopio, Finland.
Anna-Maija PietiläDepartment of Nursing Science, University of Eastern Finland, Kuopio Campus, P.O. Box 1627, 70211, Kuopio, Finland.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundProtecting human subjects from being exploited is one of the main ethical challenges for clinical research. However, there is also a responsibility to protect and respect the communities who are hosting the research. Recently, attention has focused on the most efficient way of carrying out clinical research, so that it benefits society by providing valuable research while simultaneously protecting and respecting the human subjects and the communities where the research is conducted. Collaboration between partners plays an important role and that is why we carried out a study to describe how collaborative partnership and social value are emerging in clinical research.

methodsA supra-analysis design for qualitative descriptive secondary analysis was employed to consider a novel research question that pertained to nurse leaders' perceptions of ethical recruitment in clinical research and the ethics-related aspects of clinical research from the perspective of administrative staff. The data consisted of two separate pre-existing datasets, comprising 451 pages from 41 interviews, and we considered the research question by using deductive-inductive content analysis with NVivo software. A deductive analysis matrix was generated on the basis of two requirements, namely collaborative partnership and social value, as presented in An Ethical Framework for Biomedical Research by Emanuel et al.

resultsThe findings showed that collaborative partnership was a cornerstone for ethical clinical research and ways to foster inter-partner collaboration were indicated, such as supporting mutual respect and equality, shared goals and clearly defined roles and responsibilities. In addition, the social value of clinical research was an important precondition for ethical clinical research and its realisation required the research partners to demonstrate collaboration and shared responsibility during the research process. However, concerns emerged that the multidimensional meaning of clinical research for society was not fully recognised. Achieving greater social value for clinical research required greater transparency, setting research priorities, shared responsibility for the dissemination and use of the findings and stronger community awareness of the ethics-related aspects of clinical research.

conclusionsCollaborative partnership and social values are essential for protecting the human subjects and communities involved in clinical research.

Indexed as

Biomedical ResearchCooperative BehaviorAttitude of Health PersonnelHumansNurse AdministratorsNurse's RolePatient SelectionQualitative ResearchResearch DesignSocial ValuesAn Ethical Framework for Biomedical Research.Clinical researchCollaborative partnership.Deductive-inductive content analysis.Hospital.Management.Secondary analysis.Social value.

Identifiers

PMID29070032
PMCPMC5657119

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.