4.4 Article

Reporting ethical approval in health and social science articles: an audit of adherence to GDPR and national legislation

期刊

BMC MEDICAL ETHICS
卷 22, 期 1, 页码 -

出版社

BMC
DOI: 10.1186/s12910-021-00664-w

关键词

Research ethics; Ethics approval; GDPR; Health sciences; Social sciences

资金

  1. Umea University

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The reporting of research ethics approval is reasonably good, but not strict, in health science articles, while failure to report ethical approval is about three times more frequent in social sciences compared to health sciences. Improved adherence to ethical regulations seems to be particularly needed in observational studies, articles with few authors, and social science research.
Background Previous studies have indicated that failure to report ethical approval is common in health science articles. In social sciences, the occurrence is unknown. The Swedish Ethics Review Act requests that sensitive personal data, in accordance with the EU General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), should undergo independent ethical review, irrespective of academic discipline. We have explored the adherence to this regulation. Methods Using the Web of Science databases, we reviewed 600 consecutive articles from three domains (health sciences with and without somatic focus and social sciences) based on identifiable personal data published in 2020. Results Information on ethical review was lacking in 12 of 200 health science articles with somatic focus (6%), 21 of 200 health science articles with non-somatic focus (11%), and in 54 of 200 social science articles (27%; p < 0.001 vs. both groups of health science articles). Failure to report on ethical approval was more common in (a) observational than in interventional studies (p < 0.01), (b) articles with only 1-2 authors (p < 0.001) and (c) health science articles from universities without a medical school (p < 0.001). There was no significant association between journal impact factor and failure to report ethical approval. Conclusions We conclude that reporting of research ethics approval is reasonably good, but not strict, in health science articles. Failure to report ethical approval is about three times more frequent in social sciences compared to health sciences. Improved adherence seems needed particularly in observational studies, in articles with few authors and in social science research.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.4
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据