4 found
Order:
  1.  45
    Martin Tolich (2009). The Principle of Caveat Emptor: Confidentiality and Informed Consent as Endemic Ethical Dilemmas in Focus Group Research. [REVIEW] Journal of Bioethical Inquiry 6 (1):99-108.
    Informed consent and confidentiality supposedly minimize harm for research participants in all qualitative research methodologies, inclusive of one-on-one unstructured interviews and focus groups. This is not the case for the latter. Confidentiality and informed consent uniquely manifest themselves as endemic ethical dilemmas for focus group researchers. The principle of caveat emptor (let the buyer beware) may be a more useful tool for those involved in focus group research: that is, let the researcher, the participants and the ethics committee beware that (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  2.  11
    Martin Tolich (2008). Guidelines for Community-Based Ethics Review of Children's Science Fair Projects. Journal of Bioethical Inquiry 5 (4):303-310.
    Low-level community based ethics committees staffed by teachers, parents and community representatives can readily review children’s science fair projects subject to the revision of two core assumptions currently governing children’s Science Fairs. The first part of the paper recasts the New Zealand Royal Society guidelines from its primary emphasis on risk to a new assumption, without benefit there can be no risk. Equally, this revision gives more prominence to the participant information sheet, allowing it to act as a quasi application (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  3.  10
    Martin Tolich & Kate Mary Baldwin (2005). Unequal Protection for Patient Rights: The Divide Between University and Health Ethics Committees. Journal of Bioethical Inquiry 2 (1):34-40.
    Despite recommendations from the Cartwright Report ethical review by health ethics committees has continued in New Zealand without health practitioners ever having to acknowledge their dual roles as health practitioners researching their own patients. On the other hand, universities explicitly identify doctor/research-patient relations as potentially raising conflict of role issues. This stems from the acknowledgement within the university sector itself that lecturer/research-student relations are fraught with such conflicts. Although similar unequal relationships are seen to exist between health researchers and their (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  4. Helen Gremillion, Martin Tolich & Ralph Bathurst (2015). Lay Members of New Zealand Research Ethics Committees: Who and What Do They Represent? Research Ethics 11 (2):82-97.
    Since the 1988 Cartwright Inquiry, lay members of ethics committees have been tasked with ensuring that ordinary New Zealanders are not forgotten in ethical deliberations. Unlike Institutional Review Boards in North America, where lay members constitute a fraction of ethics committee membership, 50% of most New Zealand ethics committees are comprised of lay members. Lay roles are usually defined in very broad terms, which can vary considerably from committee to committee. This research queries who lay representatives are, what they do, (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography