Developing nursing research review systems

开发护理研究评审系统

• 批准号: 17592197
• 负责人: TESHIMA Megumi
• 金额: $ 2.05万
• 依托单位: Chiba University
• 依托单位国家: 日本
• 项目类别: Grant-in-Aid for Scientific Research (C)
• 财政年份: 2005
• 资助国家: 日本
• 起止时间: 2005 至 2006
• 项目状态: 已结题
• 来源: https://kaken.nii.ac.jp/en/grant/KAKENHI-PROJECT-17592197/
• 关键词: Nursing Research; Research Ethics Review Board

The methods of nursing researches are various, including qualitative and action research methods. These are not familiar with the reviewers from the field of the nature sciences. However, many of nursing researches are actually reviewed in the health care field and organizations where nature scientists are dominant. Recently, various research guidelines for ethical research were available in Japan : Guideline for Epidemiological Research, Guideline for Clinical Research and Nursing Research from Japanese Nursing Association in 2004. However, some issues remain unsolved in the evaluation of ethical researches.In this survey, questionnaires were sent to the subjects to identify the issues of nursing research reviewing systems in Japan. 1121 persons, who presented research study in two major nursing conferences in Japan in 2006, were chosen as subjects. Questionnaires were mailed to 965 out of 1121 subjects whose addresses were identified through internet investigation. Returned rate was 43.3 %( 418). 64% of subjects' researches were reviewed from the research ethics review board.Analysis of this survey showed the several important issues such as taking a long time for reviewing more than one month, inconvenience of the system, unfairness of the evaluation, and shortage of eligible reviewers. Some pointed out that experts of nursing researches should be included in the reviewing committee. On the other hand, oversight the risks associated with social scientific research was pointed out in an article. To resolve these issues, required are as follows ; 1) a clear guideline for all research studies in health care fields should be available for both applicants and reviewers, and 2) establishing in-person meeting system for who disagree with the result from research ethics review board.

护理研究的方法多种多样，包括质性研究和行动研究。这些都是不熟悉的评论家从自然科学领域。然而，许多护理研究实际上是在自然科学家占主导地位的医疗保健领域和组织中进行的。近年来，日本有各种伦理研究的研究指南：流行病学研究指南、临床研究指南和2004年日本护理学会的护理研究指南。然而，在伦理研究的评价中，仍有一些问题没有得到解决。在这次调查中，向受试者发送了问卷，以确定日本护理研究审查制度的问题。研究对象为2006年在日本两个主要护理会议上发表研究论文的1121人。通过互联网调查确定了1121名受试者的地址，其中965名受试者邮寄了调查问卷。返回率为43.3%（418）。64%的受试者的研究由研究伦理审查委员会进行审查，通过对调查结果的分析，发现了研究伦理审查委员会审查时间过长、审查制度不方便、评价不公正、合格的审查人员短缺等几个重要问题。有意见认为评审委员会中应包括护理研究专家。另一方面，一篇文章指出了社会科学研究的风险。为了解决这些问题，需要如下：1）申请人和审查人员都应获得医疗保健领域所有研究的明确指南，2）为不同意研究伦理审查结果的人建立面对面会议制度委员会。