| Project/Area Number |
17592197
|
|---|
| Research Category |
Grant-in-Aid for Scientific Research (C)
|
| Allocation Type | Single-year Grants |
|---|
| Section | 一般 |
|---|
| Research Field |
Fundamental nursing
|
|---|
| Research Institution | Chiba University |
|---|
Principal Investigator |
TESHIMA Megumi Chiba University, Graduate Programs in Nursing, Professor, 大学院看護学研究科, 教授 (50197779)
|
|---|
| Co-Investigator(Kenkyū-buntansha) |
ISHII Toku Iwate Prefectural University, Faculty of Nursing, Professor, 看護学部看護学研究科, 教授 (10151325)
KOYAMA Mariko Kanagawa University of Human Services, Nursing, Professor, 保健福祉学部看護学科, 教授 (50178399)
NOZUE Kiyoka Keio University, Faculty of Nursing and Medical Care, Professor, 看護医療学部, 教授 (10338204)
SAKURAI Chihoko Chiba University, Graduate Programs in Nursing, Research Associate, 大学院看護学研究科, 助手 (40344973)
|
|---|
| Project Period (FY) |
2005 – 2006
|
| Project Status |
Completed (Fiscal Year 2006)
|
| Budget Amount *help |
¥3,200,000 (Direct Cost: ¥3,200,000)
Fiscal Year 2006: ¥1,200,000 (Direct Cost: ¥1,200,000)
Fiscal Year 2005: ¥2,000,000 (Direct Cost: ¥2,000,000)
|
|---|
| Keywords | Nursing Research / Research Ethics Review Board |
|---|
| Research Abstract |
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.
|
