NURS4006 Topics in Clinical Nursing

Introduction

Research is essential for providing quality patient care and for reflecting on and fostering a culture of inquiry and service improvement in healthcare. Nurses are encouraged to conduct research to address difficulties they experience in clinical practice, which has previously been dominated by doctors(Gallin & Ognibene, 2012). Students learn how to make morally weighted and ethically sound decisions in the professional and social settings of scientific research, as well as how to make morally weighted and ethically sound decisions when faced with moral challenges. Its goal is to improve people's comprehension and appreciation of the moral thinking that underpins the many laws and legal restrictions that come with study subjects and processes. Furthermore, students are taught to critically analyze cases and topics involving scientific misconduct, preparing them to respond responsibly and effectively if they come across such situations(Chandler & Shapiro, 2016). The cohort's various backgrounds and training create a unique environment and opportunity for student-led collaborative interdisciplinary learning.

Many of us are beginning to explore into our research topics in a significantly more independent manner as we progress through our program. Finally, the training wheels are starting to come off! This change is significant in our development as cancer researchers because it brings with it not only the excitement of more independence, but also the vital duty of maintaining scientific integrity. During last week's lecture, we explored several forms of ethical infractions in science as a group. We also looked at case studies that stood out for their flagrant disrespect for scientific integrity. The worst thing was that thousands upon thousands of other scholars throughout the world mentioned the papers related with these fake investigations. When the weak foundations of the resulting knowledge networks were exposed, they all came crashing down, thereby wasting all of the time, effort, and money that had gone into their construction.

Since the United States enacted legislation governing research with human subjects in the 1970s, most ethical disputes surrounding human subjects research have centered on issues connected to clinical research, such as risk management, the use of placebos in control groups, randomization, informed permission, reporting adverse events, subject recruiting, and research on vulnerable populations (Blehar et al., 2013).

Methods of Studying Human Subjects in Health Research

Human participants in environmental health research can be categorised as either observational or experimental. Experiments collect data on human subjects under controlled conditions, whereas observational studies collect data on human subjects in their natural surroundings. Case-control studies, cohort studies, field studies, and cross-sectional studies are some of the most frequent observational research designs. In epidemiological and medical research, these study designs are frequently utilized. Investigators gather information on the environmental exposures of a group of persons with an illness or condition (cases) over time and a group of persons who are comparable to the cases but do not have the disease or condition in issue in a retrospective case control study. In a prospective cohort study, researchers track a group of people (the cohort) for a long time who share a common trait (such as environmental exposure) (10 years or more). Investigators also keep track of a control group of people who do not exhibit the feature. Field studies are comparable to prospective cohort studies, except that the observation time is substantially shorter: patients may be observed for days, weeks, or months in a field research. Investigators make observations of a population at a single point in time in a cross-sectional research. Investigators use all of these strategies to see if reported differences between groups (for example, cases vs. controls or cohort vs. control) are related to variations in environmental exposures.

Environmental Health Research Ethical Issues

Environmental health research with human participants raises ethical difficulties similar to clinical research, however there are specific scenarios specific to environmental health research that produce challenges rarely addressed by clinical researchers. Many of these fresh ethical concerns arise when researchers gather data or conduct interventions in the home setting, or when they purposefully expose human subjects to harmful environmental agents like pesticides. Other novel concerns in environmental health research are likely to develop. Environmental scientists, as well as ethicists, should be prepared to address them whenever they occur. It's worth noting that, though most risk study subjects receive some compensation, this does not provide any medical advantages; most government authorities do not consider money to be a benefit. The ostensibly safe dosages are another ethical concern. A “safe” dosage is one that is not predicted to affect the research subject in the long run. Some compounds, such as ozone, that are toxic in large concentrations may cause little harm in extremely tiny concentrations. Even in little dosages, some chemicals can cause long-term harm. Benzene and asbestos, for example, are known carcinogens that can cause irreversible damage even at very low doses. It makes no difference if the dangerous exposure occurs in everyday life. For example, a construction worker may inhale asbestos dust while assisting in the demolition of an old structure, but this does not excuse deliberately exposing a human subject to asbestos dust.

Ethical Considerations in Virtual World Research

As academics begin to grasp the potential of these so-called virtual worlds, virtual worlds have become a focus of numerous disciplines in research in recent years (Bainbridge 2007). Concerns about establishing new ethical norms, or at the very least re-evaluating existing ones, have arisen as a result of the advent of new technology and procedures in research. Current researchers, on the other hand, see no harm in conducting study for the virtual world. This is seen as one of the benefits of doing this type of research. The researchers have reasoned that there is fair play in the virtual world for a variety of reasons. Others, though, questioned these justifications. The rationalizations are the result of an oversimplification of the myriad reasons why people participate in virtual world research.

There is an obvious need for greater in-depth ethical consideration when performing human subjects research in virtual worlds, as indicated in the study of virtual world research and the debate abstracted. While there has been significant discussion and debate about the potential and legitimacy of virtual world research in the academic world, there has been little discussion of the ethical concerns of such study. While the validity discussion will rage on for the foreseeable future, virtual world research is already underway and must be handled in a consistent and succinct manner.

Because of the wide range of disciplines and types of study involved, one comprehensive set of ethical rules for virtual world research would appear unfeasible, if not unattainable. Furthermore, virtual worlds might differ significantly in terms of intended usage, practice, and experience. As a result, a proposal for the formation of a stand-alone ethical rule of conduct that would apply to all virtual world research would be impractical.

Aside from the impracticality of uniform norms, such labor may be useless in the end. In the virtual world, the majority of the research ethics designed for human subjects research are still applicable and usable. To address or alleviate most of the existing issue, the basic tenants of properly honoring the participant and structural oversight in the form of IRB review boards can be used. The main issue is that the IRB procedure is carried out on a case-by-case basis, resulting in uneven findings.

Conclusions

Finally, researchers must make a conscious, long-term effort to respect the autonomy of research participants. To enlighten and educate nurse researchers on this problem, we advise holding workshops, panel discussions, conference presentations, and/or special seminars on the protection of human subjects in Internet research. Researchers should also inform participants on how their messages and communications will be used, as well as the possibility of message interception. On the Internet, complete anonymity, confidentiality, or security are impossible to achieve, while full exposure is not always achievable.

References

Blehar, M. C., Spong, C., Grady, C., Goldkind, S. F., Sahin, L., & Clayton, J. A. (2013). Enrolling pregnant women: Issues in clinical research. Women's Health Issues, 23(1), e39-e45. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.whi.2012.10.003

Chandler, J., & Shapiro, D. (2016). Conducting clinical research using Crowdsourced convenience samples. Annual Review of Clinical Psychology, 12(1), 53-81. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-clinpsy-021815-093623

Gallin, J. I., & Ognibene, F. P. (2012). Principles and practice of clinical research. Academic Press.

Do you wish you could receive law assignment help from top lawyers in the country? Now you can hire only the best industry professionals on Myassignmenthelp.co.uk. In addition, our experts provide you with in-depth dissertation help to overcome the usual hassles of writing assignments.

Additionally, you can find managers from reputable companies going out of their way to provide reliable management assignment help. Their guidance is crucial when preparing for examinations and writing research papers. Hence, whenever you wonder, "Can't someone do my assignment in the UK?” don’t settle for anything less than the best academic stalwarts on Myassignmenthelp.co.uk.