↓ Skip to main content

Variability in research ethics review of cluster randomized trials: a scenario-based survey in three countries

Overview of attention for article published in Trials, February 2014
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
16 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
53 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Variability in research ethics review of cluster randomized trials: a scenario-based survey in three countries
Published in
Trials, February 2014
DOI 10.1186/1745-6215-15-48
Pubmed ID
Authors

Monica Taljaard, Jamie C Brehaut, Charles Weijer, Robert Boruch, Allan Donner, Martin P Eccles, Andrew D McRae, Raphael Saginur, Merrick Zwarenstein, Jeremy M Grimshaw

Abstract

Cluster randomized trials (CRTs) present unique ethical challenges. In the absence of a uniform standard for their ethical design and conduct, problems such as variability in procedures and requirements by different research ethics committees will persist. We aimed to assess the need for ethics guidelines for CRTs among research ethics chairs internationally, investigate variability in procedures for research ethics review of CRTs within and among countries, and elicit research ethics chairs' perspectives on specific ethical issues in CRTs, including the identification of research subjects. The proper identification of research subjects is a necessary requirement in the research ethics review process, to help ensure, on the one hand, that subjects are protected from harm and exploitation, and on the other, that reviews of CRTs are completed efficiently.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 53 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Canada 2 4%
Malaysia 1 2%
Unknown 50 94%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 12 23%
Researcher 10 19%
Student > Master 9 17%
Professor > Associate Professor 6 11%
Other 6 11%
Other 5 9%
Unknown 5 9%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 17 32%
Nursing and Health Professions 7 13%
Philosophy 5 9%
Social Sciences 5 9%
Psychology 4 8%
Other 7 13%
Unknown 8 15%