Difference between revisions of "Resource:C3a111e8-651f-4db7-b630-563ee2fc6a51"
Line 16: | Line 16: | ||
}} | }} | ||
{{Related To | {{Related To | ||
− | |Related To Theme=Theme:0d054575-ca21-4209-b7c5-6120fc0ed647 | + | |Related To Theme=Theme:0d054575-ca21-4209-b7c5-6120fc0ed647;Theme:B14a910a-3bc4-40ff-a0e6-eb7119f51ed9 |
}} | }} | ||
{{Tags | {{Tags |
Latest revision as of 18:24, 26 February 2021
Publishing complications and patient safety
What is this about?
Why is this important?
There are several quick messages emerging here. An underlying implicit message is that even with the best intentions in mind, one may be in danger of unwillingly performing ethics misconduct.
Second, when unsure, once can ask for clarification of the best research ethics practices from the relevant institutions (in this case, COPE).
Third, the primary aim of this requested publication of cases is to inform future medical practice, and therefore, and provide an educational resource for trainees and practicing doctors. In answering, COPE provides ideas of ways to deal with this dilemma; several issues are considered in terms of privacy, stakes to be protected and legalities.
Finally, different countries might have different regulations, guidelines and practices for ethics in research, as well as different legal environments and systems when patient safety concerns are involved.