NR 505 Week 6: Discussion

NR 505 Week 6: Discussion

Biomedical research plays a crucial role in nursing practice. Nurses utilize evidence from biomedical research to make informed decisions about their patient’s care needs. Research ethics guide the strategies that nurses utilize in their research. They also ensure nurses adopt approaches that would protect the participants’ rights as well as produce credible and reliable results that inform practice. Therefore, this essay examines the impact of learning about the history of research ethics on my view of biomedical research and reflects on whether today’s researchers adequately protect the rights of human subjects.

Impact of Learning about the History of Research Ethics on My View of Biomedical Research

Learning about the history of research ethics has influenced positively my view of biomedical research. The history has made me appreciate the importance of adhering to the prescribed ethical guidelines when conducting any research. I have appreciated the important role that ethics play in ensuring the protection of the rights of the study participants. Learning about the history of research ethics also stimulates researchers to explore in detail the different ways in which they can conduct responsible and ethical research (Parra-Calderón et al., 2020). In this case, lessons from past mistakes by other researchers enable nurses to maintain research integrity, protect human subjects, and engage in researches that advance nursing practice.

Learning about the history of research ethics has also increased my understanding of the need for the consideration of different research principles in any investigation. For example, history makes it important for researchers to obtain informed consent before undertaking any investigation. Informed consent ensures the participants understand the benefits and risks of their involvement in research. Ethical principles such as respecting participant’s autonomy are important to ensure independence in decision-making and participation in research. Learning about the history of research ethics has also made me appreciate the role of Research and Ethics Committees. Every institution must have its own research and ethics committee to oversee the undertaking of any investigation involving human subjects. The committees ensure the principles of research ethics are upheld to ensure researches that advance medical practice (Garcia, 2020). Therefore, every nurse should learn about the history of research ethics.

Reflection about Studies for My PICOT Question

Today’s researchers adequately protect the rights of human subjects. This conclusion was reached after reviewing the studies selected for my PICOT questions. The researchers considered different principles of research such as seeking informed consent, protecting autonomy, data privacy and confidentiality, and ensuring beneficence and non-maleficence. Informed consent was obtained from the participants in all the studies that used human subjects. Researchers also ensured the anonymity of the study participants for their confidentiality. The information was also not shared with any unauthorized parties. All the decisions made in the selected studies aimed at promoting positive outcomes while minimizing the risk of harm. For example, all the care bundles aimed at improving ventilator-associated pneumonia measures. Research ethics and review committees also approved the studies (Childress & Beauchamp, 2022; Ginghină, 2023). This ensured that the studies met the developed criteria for ethical and sound research that advances the nursing practice and medical field.

Conclusion

In summary, learning about the history of research ethics influenced positively my view of biomedical research. It increased my understanding of the different guidelines and policies that institutions have adopted to safeguard the interests of the study participants. The knowledge has also increased my understanding of the need for institutions such as research and ethics review boards that ensure ethical and responsible research in nursing. Today’s researchers adequately protect the rights of human subjects.

References

Childress, J. F., & Beauchamp, T. L. (2022). Common Morality Principles in Biomedical Ethics: Responses to Critics. Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics, 31(2), 164–176. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0963180121000566

Garcia, J. L. A. (2020). Virtues and Principles in Biomedical Ethics. The Journal of Medicine and Philosophy: A Forum for Bioethics and Philosophy of Medicine, 45(4–5), 471–503. https://doi.org/10.1093/jmp/jhaa013

Ginghină, S. (2023). Principles of Biomedical Ethics. Logos Universality Mentality Education Novelty: Social Sciences, 12(2), Article 2. https://doi.org/10.18662/lumenss/12.2/97

Parra-Calderón, C. L., Sanz, F., & McIntosh, L. D. (2020). The Challenge of the Effective Implementation of FAIR Principles in Biomedical Research. Methods of Information in Medicine, 59(4/5), 117–118. https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0040-1721726

ORDER A PLAGIARISM-FREE PAPER HERE

Discussion

Purpose

Respond to the following prompts:

• How has learning about the history of research ethics impacted your view of biomedical research?
• In looking at the studies you reviewed for your PICOT question, do you feel that today’s researchers adequately protect the rights of human subjects? If not, what additional measures do you recommend?

Due Date

A 5% late penalty will be imposed for discussions posted after the deadline on Wednesday, regardless of the number of days late. NOTHING will be accepted after 11:59pm MT on Sunday (i.e. student will receive an automatic 0 for any portion of the discussion not posted by that time).

NOTE: To receive credit for a week’s discussion, students may begin posting no earlier than the Sunday immediately before each week opens. Unless otherwise specified, access to most weeks begins on Sunday at 12:01 a.m. MT, and that week’s assignments are due by the next Sunday by 11:59 p.m. MT. Week 8 opens at 12:01 a.m. MT Sunday and closes at 11:59 p.m. MT Saturday.

A zero is the lowest score that a student can be assigned.

Faculty may submit any collaborative discussion posting to Turnitin in order to verify originality.

Total Points Possible: 50

Preparing the Assignment

1. Application of Course Knowledge: The student’s initial post contributes unique perspectives or insights gleaned from personal experience or examples from the healthcare field. The student must accurately and fully discuss the topic for the week in addition to providing personal or professional examples. The student must completely answer the entire initial question. Initial post due by Wednesday at 11:59pm MT. You must include two resources in your initial post: one from your lesson or weekly reading and one from an outside scholarly source.
2. Engagement in Meaningful Dialogue: The student responds to a student peer and course faculty to further dialogue.
   1. Peer Response: The student responds substantively to at least one topic-related post by a student peer. A substantive post adds content or insights or asks a question that will add to the learning experience and/or generate discussion.
      • A post of “I agree” with a repeat of the other student’s post does not count as a substantive post. A collection of shallow posts does not equal a substantive post.
      • The peer response must occur on a separate day from the initial posting.
      • The peer response must occur before Sunday, 11:59 p.m. MT.
      • The peer response does not require a scholarly citation and reference unless the information is paraphrased and/or direct quotes are used, in which APA style standards then apply.
   2. Faculty Response: The student responds substantively to at least one question by course faculty. The faculty question may be directed to the student, to another student, or to the entire class.
      • A post of “I agree” with a repeat of the faculty’s post does not count as a substantive post. A collection of shallow posts does not equal a substantive post.
      • The faculty response must occur on a separate day from the initial posting.
      • Responses to the faculty member must occur by Sunday, 11:59 p.m. MT.
      • This response does not require a scholarly citation and reference unless the information is paraphrased and/or direct quotes are used, in which APA style standards then apply.
3. Integration of Evidence: The student post provides support from a minimum of one scholarly in-text citation with a matching reference AND assigned readings OR online lessons, per discussion topic per week. Two resources total and to count must be an in-text citation.
   1. What is a scholarly resource? A scholarly resource is one that comes from a professional, peer-reviewed publication (e.g., journals and government reports such as those from the FDA or CDC).
      • Contains references for sources cited
      • Written by a professional or scholar in the field and indicates credentials of the author(s)
      • Is no more than 5 years old for clinical or research article
   2. What is not considered a scholarly resource?
      • Newspaper articles and layperson literature (e.g., Readers Digest, Healthy Life Magazine, Food, and Fitness)
      • Information from Wikipedia or any wiki
      • Textbooks
      • Website homepages
      • The weekly lesson
      • Articles in healthcare and nursing-oriented trade magazines, such as Nursing Made Incredibly Easy and RNMagazine (Source: What is a scholarly article.docx; Created 06/09 CK/CL Revised: 02/17/11, 09/02/11 nlh/clm)
   3. Can the lesson for the week be used as a scholarly source?
      • Information from the weekly lesson can be cited in a posting; however, it is not to be the sole source used in the post.
   4. Are resources provided from CU acceptable sources (e.g., the readings for the week)?
      • Not as a sole source within the post. The textbook and/or assigned (required) articles for the week can be used, but another outside source must be cited for full credit. Textbooks are not considered scholarly sources for the purpose of discussions.
   5. Are websites acceptable as scholarly resources for discussions?
      • Yes, if they are documents or data cited from credible websites. Credible websites usually end in .gov or .edu; however, some .org sites that belong to professional associations (e.g., American Heart Association, National League for Nursing, American Diabetes Association) are also considered credible websites. Websites ending with .com are not to be used as scholarly resources
4. Professionalism in Communication: The post presents information in logical, meaningful, and understandable sequence, and is clearly relevant to the discussion topic. Grammar, spelling, and/or punctuation are accurate.
5. Wednesday Participation Requirement: The student provides a substantive response to the graded discussion question(s) or topic(s), posted by the course faculty (not a response to a peer), by Wednesday, 11:59 p.m. MT of each week.
6. Total Participation Requirement: The student provides at least three substantive posts (one to the initial question or topic, one to a student peer, and one to a faculty question) on two different days during the week.

Discussion Rubric