2.50
Hdl Handle:
http://hdl.handle.net/10755/161137
Type:
Presentation
Title:
Scientific Misconduct: Role of the Research Coordinator
Abstract:
Scientific Misconduct: Role of the Research Coordinator
Conference Sponsor:Midwest Nursing Research Society
Conference Year:2005
Author:Broome, Marion, PhD, RN, FAAN
P.I. Institution Name:Indiana University
Title:Dean
Contact Address:School of Nursing, 1111 Middle Dr. NU 132, Indianapolis, IN, 46202, USA
Contact Telephone:317-274-1486
Co-Authors:Erica R. Pryor, PhD, RN and Barbara Habermann, PhD, RN
The purpose of this study was to conduct a national survey of clinical
research coordinators (RCs) to describe their beliefs and experiences with
Scientific Misconduct (SM). The Scientific Misconduct
Questionnaire-revised was completed by 820 RCs, the majority of whom were
female (95.4%), Caucasian (92.2%), RNs (62.2%) and certified in clinical
research (79.4%), with a mean age of 46. The mean number of studies for
which RCs enrolled subjects was 5, while the mean number of studies they
were responsible for following (but not enrolling) subjects in was 7. The
most common SM types reported were violations of subject enrollment
(42.7%) and protocols (48.9) but most described the frequency of these
violations as seldom. Only 200 (19.1%) indicated that coercion of
potential subjects occurred. One-fourth (24.1%) indicated that pressure
from sponsors to engage in unethical practices occurred, but very
infrequently. In spite of the low frequency of SM, 42.1% (n=345) indicated
that they were concerned about the amount of SM. RCs believed chances for
getting caught for SM were high (67.4%) and penalties would be severe
(73.9%). Two-thirds (67.6%) indicated that if someone engaged in SM and
was reported, they were very likely to be disciplined; however, 10.7 %
indicated that the discipline would depend on the person's position. When
asked what a typical RC would do if they were aware that an investigator
violated rules for research integrity, 9.5% believed a typical RC would do
nothing, 37.3% would express disapproval to the PI but not report it,
26.6% would ask the investigator to report themselves and report it if
not, and 24.6% would report the PI to appropriate authorities. Although
the actual prevalence of SM in this study is similar to previous reports,
these findings provide more information about the actual scope of
misconduct and actions taken by RCs when aware of SM.
Repository Posting Date:
26-Oct-2011
Date of Publication:
17-Oct-2011
Sponsors:
Midwest Nursing Research Society

Full metadata record

DC FieldValue Language
dc.typePresentationen_GB
dc.titleScientific Misconduct: Role of the Research Coordinatoren_GB
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10755/161137-
dc.description.abstract<table><tr><td colspan="2" class="item-title">Scientific Misconduct: Role of the Research Coordinator</td></tr><tr class="item-sponsor"><td class="label">Conference Sponsor:</td><td class="value">Midwest Nursing Research Society</td></tr><tr class="item-year"><td class="label">Conference Year:</td><td class="value">2005</td></tr><tr class="item-author"><td class="label">Author:</td><td class="value">Broome, Marion, PhD, RN, FAAN</td></tr><tr class="item-institute"><td class="label">P.I. Institution Name:</td><td class="value">Indiana University</td></tr><tr class="item-author-title"><td class="label">Title:</td><td class="value">Dean</td></tr><tr class="item-address"><td class="label">Contact Address:</td><td class="value">School of Nursing, 1111 Middle Dr. NU 132, Indianapolis, IN, 46202, USA</td></tr><tr class="item-phone"><td class="label">Contact Telephone:</td><td class="value">317-274-1486</td></tr><tr class="item-email"><td class="label">Email:</td><td class="value">mbroome@iupui.edu</td></tr><tr class="item-co-authors"><td class="label">Co-Authors:</td><td class="value">Erica R. Pryor, PhD, RN and Barbara Habermann, PhD, RN</td></tr><tr><td colspan="2" class="item-abstract">The purpose of this study was to conduct a national survey of clinical <br/> research coordinators (RCs) to describe their beliefs and experiences with <br/> Scientific Misconduct (SM). The Scientific Misconduct <br/> Questionnaire-revised was completed by 820 RCs, the majority of whom were <br/> female (95.4%), Caucasian (92.2%), RNs (62.2%) and certified in clinical <br/> research (79.4%), with a mean age of 46. The mean number of studies for <br/> which RCs enrolled subjects was 5, while the mean number of studies they <br/> were responsible for following (but not enrolling) subjects in was 7. The <br/> most common SM types reported were violations of subject enrollment <br/> (42.7%) and protocols (48.9) but most described the frequency of these <br/> violations as seldom. Only 200 (19.1%) indicated that coercion of <br/> potential subjects occurred. One-fourth (24.1%) indicated that pressure <br/> from sponsors to engage in unethical practices occurred, but very <br/> infrequently. In spite of the low frequency of SM, 42.1% (n=345) indicated <br/> that they were concerned about the amount of SM. RCs believed chances for <br/> getting caught for SM were high (67.4%) and penalties would be severe <br/> (73.9%). Two-thirds (67.6%) indicated that if someone engaged in SM and <br/> was reported, they were very likely to be disciplined; however, 10.7 % <br/> indicated that the discipline would depend on the person's position. When <br/> asked what a typical RC would do if they were aware that an investigator <br/> violated rules for research integrity, 9.5% believed a typical RC would do <br/> nothing, 37.3% would express disapproval to the PI but not report it, <br/> 26.6% would ask the investigator to report themselves and report it if <br/> not, and 24.6% would report the PI to appropriate authorities. Although <br/> the actual prevalence of SM in this study is similar to previous reports, <br/> these findings provide more information about the actual scope of <br/> misconduct and actions taken by RCs when aware of SM.</td></tr></table>en_GB
dc.date.available2011-10-26T23:16:30Z-
dc.date.issued2011-10-17en_GB
dc.date.accessioned2011-10-26T23:16:30Z-
dc.description.sponsorshipMidwest Nursing Research Societyen_GB
All Items in this repository are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.