NRS 445 Benchmark – Ethical Conduct of Scholarly Activities
Ethical Conduct of Scholarly Activities
Ethics plays an important role in nursing practice and research. Nurses, researchers, and other stakeholders in health should adopt interventions that respect legal and ethical requirements in their practice. Therefore, this paper examines a case study involving a patient who has been diagnosed with an aggressive cancer. The patient has chosen an experiment with benefits and risks that should be weighed before it is undertaken. The paper examines whether the case study meets and does not meet the components of respect, beneficence, justice, and the steps that a nurse or quality improvement manager can take to adhere to the principles.
How the Case Study Meets and Does Not Meet the Components of Respect
Respect for persons is one of the ethical considerations in any experimental research. Researchers and healthcare providers incorporate the elements of treating people as autonomous and protecting those with diminished autonomy as a way of respecting people in their practice. Autonomy ensures that people make their decisions on whether to participate or not in any study, investigation, or intervention. People can make decisions on what to agree to and what to do. Healthcare providers and researchers must provide individuals with complete, comprehensive information about their roles, potential risks, and benefits of participating in research. This is important to ensure the participants make informed decisions on whether to take part or not (Subramani & Biller-Andorno, 2022). The participants should also have the right to withdraw from the study at any time or point they wish.
The case study meets the components of respect for persons. Firstly, the hospital has provided comprehensive evidence-based data about the benefits and potential risks of the patient participating in the experimental study. The patient has also been given enough time (three weeks) to make informed decisions and involve their significant others in their intentions. However, the case study does not give further information on whether the patient received comprehensive and written information about the experimental study. The case study also does not show if the patient and her spouse received any counseling services since the spouse does not support the decision for the patient’s participation in the study. It also does not provide information about voluntary participation and withdrawal from the investigation.NRS 445 Benchmark – Ethical Conduct of Scholarly Activities
The nurse or quality improvement manager should ensure both verbal and written information about the experimental study, its benefits, and risks should be offered to the family. The information should be expressed in plain language to increase their understanding. They should also ensure the availability of counseling services to help the family understand better the experimental study, its benefits, and its risks. The nurse or quality improvement manager should inform the spouse that healthcare providers and institutions respect their patients’ cultural values, beliefs, and preferences. They should also inform the patient that she might withdraw from the study any time she wishes. However, the patient is an adult who has the right to make decisions about their health (Bilotta, 2023). Therefore, they are obligated to protect her decisions irrespective of the benefits or risks that might be experienced in the study.
How the Case Study Meets and Does Not Meet the Components of Beneficence
Beneficence is the ethical consideration that aims at ensuring that healthcare providers and researchers make decisions that benefit their patients. Healthcare providers and researchers prioritize the patient’s interests in making decisions. Through it, they demonstrate kindness and aim to ensure positive outcomes in the treatment process (Pietilä et al., 2020). When demonstrating kindness and optimizing outcomes, healthcare providers should minimize the possible risks of the experimental treatment for the participants.
The case study meets the components of beneficence. The hospital provides comprehensive information about the benefits and risks of the new cancer treatment. It provides data that the treatment is 8% effective and a woman has been cancer-free for six years following the intervention. Based on the data, the researchers believe that the benefits of the new treatment outweigh the risks of living with aggressive cancer due to its poor prognosis. However, the case study does not provide the patient with other essential information such as monitoring her for adverse effects and measures that have been adopted to ensure continuous monitoring of the trial’s progress in the past.
The nurse or quality manager should ensure the close monitoring of any adverse effects should the patient be enrolled in the trial. They should ensure the discontinuation of the intervention should the patient develop adverse effects such as cardiac arrest. The nurse or quality manager should also ensure the patient is adequately informed about the benefits and potential risks associated with the treatment (Cascio et al., 2020). They should communicate their dedication to close monitoring of the trial’s progress and inform the patient.
How the Case Study Meets and Does Not Meet the Components of Justice
Justice is an ethical principle that focuses on ensuring fairness and equity in treatment. The patient’s right to fair treatment during the experimental study should be upheld. Patients enrolled in the experimental study should have equitable access to healthcare services similar to those not in the study. Access to other forms of treatment should not be based on factors such as age, religion, ethnicity, race, gender, or disability among others. The researchers should also ensure fairness in the approaches adopted in recruiting participants and the interventions used. The participant selection should not be merely because they can be accessed easily or available but meet the dimensions developed for the investigation (Ajuwon, 2020). The interventions must only be used in populations that are likely to utilize, benefit from, and be safe for them.
The case study meets some components of justice. Firstly, the experimental study is only intended for cancer patients. Cancer patients might benefit from the interventions despite being associated with adverse effects. Participant selection is not merely based on easy access or availability but on the developed criteria for the study. However, the case study does not provide information about inclusion and exclusion criteria and participant selection and assignment to either control or intervention groups.
The nurse or quality improvement manager must ensure participant selection, inclusion, or exclusion in the control or intervention groups are clearly stated and communicated to the participants. The selection and access to treatment and other benefits should not be based on factors such as age, gender, or ethnicity among others (Kraft et al., 2021). The participants’ access to other care services should also be not limited because of their involvement in their research.
Conclusion
In summary, the case study meets most of the components of respect for persons, justice, and beneficence. It does not address some components associated with these ethical principles. As a result, the nurse or quality improvement manager should adopt interventions that address the identified gaps. They should also ensure the protection of the participant’s rights in any decisions made.
References
Ajuwon, A. J. (2020). Ethical Principles & Responsible Conduct in Research. African Journal of Biomedical Research, 23(SE2), Article SE2.
Bilotta, N. (2023). ‘Respect’ and ‘justice’ for whom? Culturally irresponsive ethical practices with refugee communities. International Social Work, 66(3), 817–830. https://doi.org/10.1177/00208728211031967
Cascio, M. A., Weiss, J. A., & Racine, E. (2020). Person-Oriented Research Ethics to Address the Needs of Participants on the Autism Spectrum. Ethics & Human Research, 42(5), 2–16. https://doi.org/10.1002/eahr.500064
Kraft, S. A., Rothwell, E., Shah, S. K., Duenas, D. M., Lewis, H., Muessig, K., Opel, D. J., Goddard, K. A. B., & Wilfond, B. S. (2021). Demonstrating ‘respect for persons’ in clinical research: Findings from qualitative interviews with diverse genomics research participants. Journal of Medical Ethics, 47(12), e8–e8. https://doi.org/10.1136/medethics-2020-106440
Pietilä, A.-M., Nurmi, S.-M., Halkoaho, A., & Kyngäs, H. (2020). Qualitative Research: Ethical Considerations. In H. Kyngäs, K. Mikkonen, & M. Kääriäinen (Eds.), The Application of Content Analysis in Nursing Science Research (pp. 49–69). Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-30199-6_6
Subramani, S., & Biller-Andorno, N. (2022). Revisiting respect for persons: Conceptual analysis and implications for clinical practice. Medicine, Health Care, and Philosophy, 25(3), 351–360. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11019-022-10079-y
ORDER A PLAGIARISM-FREE PAPER HERE
Assessment Description
The focus of this assignment is to apply the principles detailed in the Belmont Report to case studies involving human subjects in research or a quality improvement project.
Utilize the “Ethical Conduct of Scholarly Activities” document to complete this assignment.
While APA style is not required for the body of this assignment, solid academic writing is expected, and documentation of sources should be presented using APA formatting guidelines, which can be found in the APA Style Guide, located in the Student Success Center.
This assignment uses a rubric. Please review the rubric prior to beginning the assignment to become familiar with the expectations for successful completion.
You are required to submit this assignment to LopesWrite. A link to the LopesWrite technical support articles is located in Class Resources if you need assistance.NRS 445 Benchmark – Ethical Conduct of Scholarly Activities
Benchmark Information
This benchmark assignment assesses the following programmatic competencies and professional standards:
RN-BSN
4.3: Promote the ethical conduct of scholarly activities [AACN ]
American Association of Colleges of Nursing Core Competencies for Professional Nursing Education
This assignment aligns to AACN Core Competency 1.2, 4.3, 9.1, 10.2
Attachments
NRS-445-RS-T2EthicalConductofScholarlyActivities-InstructorGuide.docxNRS-445-RS-T2EthicalConductofSc
Skip to main contentEnable accessibility for visually impairedOpen the accessibility menuOpen the Accessible Navigation Menu
Benchmark – Ethical Conduct of Scholarly Activities – Rubric
LISTGRID
PRINT TO PDF
Rubric Criteria
Total140 points
| Criterion | 1. Unsatisfactory | 2. Insufficient | 3. Approaching | 4. Acceptable | 5. Target |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Case 1: Respect for Person
Explanation of how Case Study 1 meets and does not meet the components of respect for person, as well as steps that can be taken by nurse or quality improvement manager to adhere to ethical principles in respect for person. |
0 points
Explanation of how Case Study 1 meets and does not meet the components of respect for person, as well as steps that can be taken by nurse or quality improvement manager to adhere to ethical principles in respect for person, is not present. |
12.6 points
Explanation of how Case Study 1 meets and does not meet the components of respect for person, as well as steps that can be taken by nurse or quality improvement manager to adhere to ethical principles in respect for person, is inaccurate or incomplete. |
13.27 points
Explanation of how Case Study 1 meets and does not meet the components of respect for person, as well as steps that can be taken by nurse or quality improvement manager to adhere to ethical principles in respect for person, is present. |
14.95 points
Explanation of how Case Study 1 meets and does not meet the components of respect for person, as well as steps that can be taken by nurse or quality improvement manager to adhere to ethical principles in respect for person, is detailed. |
16.8 points
Explanation of how Case Study 1 meets and does not meet the components of respect for person, as well as steps that can be taken by nurse or quality improvement manager to adhere to ethical principles in respect for person, is thorough. |
| Case 1: Beneficence
Explanation of how Case Study 1 meets and does not meet the components of beneficence, as well as steps that can be taken by nurse or quality improvement manager to adhere to ethical principles in beneficence. |
0 points
Explanation of how Case Study 1 meets and does not meet the components of beneficence, as well as steps that can be taken by nurse or quality improvement manager to adhere to ethical principles in beneficence, is not present. |
12.6 points
Explanation of how Case Study 1 meets and does not meet the components of beneficence, as well as steps that can be taken by nurse or quality improvement manager to adhere to ethical principles in beneficence, is inaccurate or incomplete. |
13.27 points
Explanation of how Case Study 1 meets and does not meet the components of beneficence, as well as steps that can be taken by nurse or quality improvement manager to adhere to ethical principles in beneficence, is present. |
14.95 points
Explanation of how Case Study 1 meets and does not meet the components of beneficence, as well as steps that can be taken by nurse or quality improvement manager to adhere to ethical principles in beneficence, is detailed. |
16.8 points
Explanation of how Case Study 1 meets and does not meet the components of beneficence, as well as steps that can be taken by nurse or quality improvement manager to adhere to ethical principles in beneficence, is thorough. |
| Case 1: Justice
Explanation of how Case Study 1 meets and does not meet the components of justice, as well as steps that can be taken by nurse or quality improvement manager to adhere to ethical principles in justice. |
0 points
Explanation of how Case Study 1 meets and does not meet the components of justice, as well as steps that can be taken by nurse or quality improvement manager to adhere to ethical principles in justice, is not present. |
12.6 points
Explanation of how Case Study 1 meets and does not meet the components of justice, as well as steps that can be taken by nurse or quality improvement manager to adhere to ethical principles in justice, is inaccurate or incomplete. |
13.27 points
Explanation of how Case Study 1 meets and does not meet the components of justice, as well as steps that can be taken by nurse or quality improvement manager to adhere to ethical principles in justice, is present. |
14.95 points
Explanation of how Case Study 1 meets and does not meet the components of justice, as well as steps that can be taken by nurse or quality improvement manager to adhere to ethical principles in justice, is detailed. |
16.8 points
Explanation of how Case Study 1 meets and does not meet the components of justice, as well as steps that can be taken by nurse or quality improvement manager to adhere to ethical principles in justice, is thorough. |
| Case 2: Respect for Person
Explanation of how Case Study 2 meets and does not meet the components of respect for person, as well as steps that can be taken by nurse or quality improvement manager to adhere to ethical principles in respect for person. |
0 points
Explanation of how Case Study 2 meets and does not meet the components of respect for person, as well as steps that can be taken by nurse or quality improvement manager to adhere to ethical principles in respect for person, is not present. |
12.6 points
Explanation of how Case Study 2 meets and does not meet the components of respect for person, as well as steps that can be taken by nurse or quality improvement manager to adhere to ethical principles in respect for person, is inaccurate or incomplete. |
13.27 points
Explanation of how Case Study 2 meets and does not meet the components of respect for person, as well as steps that can be taken by nurse or quality improvement manager to adhere to ethical principles in respect for person, is present. |
14.95 points
Explanation of how Case Study 2 meets and does not meet the components of respect for person, as well as steps that can be taken by nurse or quality improvement manager to adhere to ethical principles in respect for person, is detailed. |
16.8 points
Explanation of how Case Study 2 meets and does not meet the components of respect for person, as well as steps that can be taken by nurse or quality improvement manager to adhere to ethical principles in respect for person, is thorough. |
| Case 2: Beneficence
Explanation of how Case Study 2 meets and does not meet the components of beneficence, as well as steps that can be taken by nurse or quality improvement manager to adhere to ethical principles in beneficence. |
0 points
Explanation of how Case Study 2 meets and does not meet the components of beneficence, as well as steps that can be taken by nurse or quality improvement manager to adhere to ethical principles in beneficence, is not present. |
12.6 points
Explanation of how Case Study 2 meets and does not meet the components of beneficence, as well as steps that can be taken by nurse or quality improvement manager to adhere to ethical principles in beneficence, is inaccurate or incomplete. |
13.27 points
Explanation of how Case Study 2 meets and does not meet the components of beneficence, as well as steps that can be taken by nurse or quality improvement manager to adhere to ethical principles in beneficence, is present. |
14.95 points
Explanation of how Case Study 2 meets and does not meet the components of beneficence, as well as steps that can be taken by nurse or quality improvement manager to adhere to ethical principles in beneficence, is detailed. |
16.8 points
Explanation of how Case Study 2 meets and does not meet the components of beneficence, as well as steps that can be taken by nurse or quality improvement manager to adhere to ethical principles in beneficence, is thorough. |
| Case 2: Justice
Explanation of how Case Study 2 meets and does not meet the components of justice, as well as steps that can be taken by nurse or quality improvement manager to adhere to ethical principles in justice. |
0 points
Explanation of how Case Study 2 meets and does not meet the components of justice, as well as steps that can be taken by nurse or quality improvement manager to adhere to ethical principles in justice, is not present. |
12.6 points
Explanation of how Case Study 2 meets and does not meet the components of justice, as well as steps that can be taken by nurse or quality improvement manager to adhere to ethical principles in justice, is inaccurate or incomplete. |
13.27 points
Explanation of how Case Study 2 meets and does not meet the components of justice, as well as steps that can be taken by nurse or quality improvement manager to adhere to ethical principles in justice, is present. |
14.95 points
Explanation of how Case Study 2 meets and does not meet the components of justice, as well as steps that can be taken by nurse or quality improvement manager to adhere to ethical principles in justice, is detailed. |
16.8 points
Explanation of how Case Study 2 meets and does not meet the components of justice, as well as steps that can be taken by nurse or quality improvement manager to adhere to ethical principles in justice, is thorough. |
| Ethical Principles, Christian Worldview, and Nursing Practice
Discussion of how the ethical principles of the Belmont Report align with the Christian worldview and with personal nursing practice. |
0 points
Discussion of how the ethical principles of the Belmont Report align with the Christian worldview and with personal nursing practice is not present. |
8.4 points
Discussion of how the ethical principles of the Belmont Report align with the Christian worldview and with personal nursing practice is inaccurate or incomplete. |
8.85 points
Discussion of how the ethical principles of the Belmont Report align with the Christian worldview and with personal nursing practice is present. |
9.97 points
Discussion of how the ethical principles of the Belmont Report align with the Christian worldview and with personal nursing practice is detailed. |
11.2 points
Discussion of how the ethical principles of the Belmont Report align with the Christian worldview and with personal nursing practice is thorough. |
| Demonstration of Professional Aptitude for Ethical Conduct (B)
Overall demonstration of professional aptitude for application of ethical research guidelines, ethical behaviors, and advocacy for the protection of participants in scholarly initiatives and scholarly practice-based projects. (C.4.3) |
0 points
The learner does not demonstrate professional aptitude in the application of ethical research guidelines, ethical behaviors, and advocacy for the protection of participants in scholarly initiatives and scholarly practice-based projects. Rationale is not appropriate or does not reflect the assignment criteria and nursing content. Support for both factual and subjective responses is not provided. |
10.5 points
The learner inconsistently demonstrates professional aptitude in the application of ethical research guidelines, ethical behaviors, and advocacy for the protection of participants in scholarly initiatives and scholarly practice-based projects. Rationale is lacking and does not reflect the assignment criteria and nursing content in many scenarios. Overall, support for both factual and subjective responses is lacking. |
11.06 points
The learner demonstrates adequate professional aptitude for application of ethical research guidelines, ethical behaviors, and advocacy for the protection of participants in scholarly initiatives and scholarly practice-based projects. Rationale is mostly appropriate for the assignment criteria and nursing content and provides general support for both factual and subjective responses throughout. |
12.46 points
The learner demonstrates professional aptitude for application of ethical research guidelines, ethical behaviors, and advocacy for the protection of participants in scholarly initiatives and scholarly practice-based projects. Rationale is appropriate for the assignment criteria and nursing content and provides support for both factual and subjective responses throughout. |
14 points
The learner clearly demonstrates professional aptitude for application of ethical research guidelines, ethical behaviors, and advocacy for the protection of participants in scholarly initiatives and scholarly practice-based projects. Rationale is appropriate for the assignment criteria and nursing content and provides strong support for both factual and subjective responses throughout. |
| Mechanics of Writing
Includes spelling, capitalization, punctuation, grammar, language use, sentence structure, etc. |
0 points
Errors in grammar or syntax are pervasive and impede meaning. Incorrect language choice or sentence structure errors are found throughout. |
6.3 points
Frequent and repetitive mechanical errors are present. Inconsistencies in language choice or sentence structure are recurrent. |
6.64 points
Occasional mechanical errors are present. Language choice is generally appropriate. Varied sentence structure is attempted. |
7.48 points
Few mechanical errors are present. Suitable language choice and sentence structure are used. |
8.4 points
No mechanical errors are present. Appropriate language choice and sentence structure are used throughout. |
| Format/Documentation
Uses appropriate style, such as APA, MLA, etc., for college, subject, and level; documents sources using citations, footnotes, references, bibliography, etc., appropriate to assignment and discipline. |
0 points
Appropriate format is not used. No documentation of sources is provided. |
4.2 points
Appropriate format is attempted, but some elements are missing. Frequent errors in documentation of sources are evident. |
4.42 points
Appropriate format and documentation are used, although there are some obvious errors. |
4.98 points
Appropriate format and documentation are used with only minor errors. |
5.6 points
No errors in formatting or documentation are present. |