This week’s Research Ethics Roundup reviews a Congressional hearing on reducing overhead payments for research oversight, highlights doctors’ arguments for saving the Fogarty International Center at the National Institute of Health (NIH), discusses legal challenges faced by the US Department of Agriculture (USDA) over their decision to delay reposting animal welfare records, and outlines a proposal that allow human subjects to negotiate with the pharmaceutical industry on drug pricing issues.
House Science Panel Joins Trump in Questioning Research Overhead Payments
Jeffrey Mervis reports for Science on a recent Congressional hearing in which representatives reviewed the [...] Read more
As the biomedical research enterprise increasingly moves to a more participatory model of research, where research participants are treated more as partners than passive subjects, we can expect greater emphasis on returning individual-level results of research to participants. A prominent example is the All of Us Research Program. Read more
At the beginning of May, PRIM&R shared a blog post by Ross Hickey and Jennifer Karlin about the importance of responsible conduct in research (RCR) and the efforts, spearheaded by MeRTEC, to build capacity in the field of research integrity. MeRTEC is currently seeking input from research integrity stakeholders to capture the breadth, depth, and interconnectedness of an RCR research agenda. Anyone can participate in this endeavor by completing their survey. The survey closes Sunday, June 25. We encourage you to share the link widely. Read more
In early 2014, PRIM&R explored the topic of what we call individuals who volunteer for research in a post titled "What’s in a name? Research 'participant' versus research 'subject'." In this post, PRIM&R concludes that, on the whole, "subject" is the most appropriate title for those involved in research studies (recognizing, however, that in some instances "participant " may be appropriate; for example, in community-based participatory and participant-led research). Herein we present the contrasting points of view of three individuals. Read more
This week’s Research Ethics Roundup highlights a Nature editorial that encourages researchers to push back against both public and private forms of censorship in research contracts, the National Institute of Health (NIH)’s Comparative Genomics Branch issues new study with implications for both human and dog disease research, the World Health Organization (WHO) speaks with Doctors Without Borders about using an experimental vaccine to target a new Ebola outbreak, and bioethicists' concern about stem cell researchers' failure to publish study results including discoveries on side effects. Read more
As part of the Interagency Collaborative Animal Research Education (ICARE) Project, PRIM&R convened two Train-the-Trainers Institutes (TTIs) in 2016 for IACUC leaders and educators to learn how active learning techniques can enhance the effectiveness of their training programs. To further disseminate the materials and lessons from the TTIs, PRIM&R hosted the free webinar Incorporating Active Learning into IACUC Training. We’re pleased to share answers to follow-up questions from the webinar with the readers of Ampersand. Read more