Progress in centralised ethics review processes: Implications for multi-site health evaluations

Brenton PROSSER, Rachel DAVEY, Diane GIBSON

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

1 Citation (Scopus)

Abstract

Increasingly, public sector programmes respond to complex social problems that intersect specific fields and individual disciplines. Such responses result in multi-site initiatives that can span nations, jurisdictions, sectors and organisations. The rigorous evaluation of public sector programmes is now a baseline expectation. For evaluations of large and complex multi-site programme initiatives, the processes of ethics review can present a significant challenge. However in recent years, there have been new developments in centralised ethics review processes in many nations. This paper provides the case study of an evaluation of a national, inter-jurisdictional, cross-sector, aged care health initiative and its encounters with Australian centralised ethics review processes. Specifically, the paper considers progress against the key themes of a previous five-year, five nation study (. Fitzgerald and Phillips, 2006), which found that centralised ethics review processes would save time, money and effort, as well as contribute to more equitable workloads for researchers and evaluators. The paper concludes with insights for those charged with refining centralised ethics review processes, as well as recommendations for future evaluators of complex multi-site programme initiatives.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)117-123
Number of pages7
JournalEvaluation and Program Planning
Volume49
Issue number9
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2015

Fingerprint

ethics
Ethics
moral philosophy
Health
health
evaluation
Public Sector
public sector
Health Care Sector
social problem
Social Problems
Workload
workload
health care
jurisdiction
money
Research Personnel
Review process
Evaluation
Organizations

Cite this

@article{a6b760830c324ebab3b929a40518f236,
title = "Progress in centralised ethics review processes: Implications for multi-site health evaluations",
abstract = "Increasingly, public sector programmes respond to complex social problems that intersect specific fields and individual disciplines. Such responses result in multi-site initiatives that can span nations, jurisdictions, sectors and organisations. The rigorous evaluation of public sector programmes is now a baseline expectation. For evaluations of large and complex multi-site programme initiatives, the processes of ethics review can present a significant challenge. However in recent years, there have been new developments in centralised ethics review processes in many nations. This paper provides the case study of an evaluation of a national, inter-jurisdictional, cross-sector, aged care health initiative and its encounters with Australian centralised ethics review processes. Specifically, the paper considers progress against the key themes of a previous five-year, five nation study (. Fitzgerald and Phillips, 2006), which found that centralised ethics review processes would save time, money and effort, as well as contribute to more equitable workloads for researchers and evaluators. The paper concludes with insights for those charged with refining centralised ethics review processes, as well as recommendations for future evaluators of complex multi-site programme initiatives.",
author = "Brenton PROSSER and Rachel DAVEY and Diane GIBSON",
year = "2015",
doi = "10.1016/j.evalprogplan.2014.12.021",
language = "English",
volume = "49",
pages = "117--123",
journal = "Evaluation and Program Planning",
issn = "0149-7189",
publisher = "Elsevier Limited",
number = "9",

}

Progress in centralised ethics review processes: Implications for multi-site health evaluations. / PROSSER, Brenton; DAVEY, Rachel; GIBSON, Diane.

In: Evaluation and Program Planning, Vol. 49, No. 9, 2015, p. 117-123.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

TY - JOUR

T1 - Progress in centralised ethics review processes: Implications for multi-site health evaluations

AU - PROSSER, Brenton

AU - DAVEY, Rachel

AU - GIBSON, Diane

PY - 2015

Y1 - 2015

N2 - Increasingly, public sector programmes respond to complex social problems that intersect specific fields and individual disciplines. Such responses result in multi-site initiatives that can span nations, jurisdictions, sectors and organisations. The rigorous evaluation of public sector programmes is now a baseline expectation. For evaluations of large and complex multi-site programme initiatives, the processes of ethics review can present a significant challenge. However in recent years, there have been new developments in centralised ethics review processes in many nations. This paper provides the case study of an evaluation of a national, inter-jurisdictional, cross-sector, aged care health initiative and its encounters with Australian centralised ethics review processes. Specifically, the paper considers progress against the key themes of a previous five-year, five nation study (. Fitzgerald and Phillips, 2006), which found that centralised ethics review processes would save time, money and effort, as well as contribute to more equitable workloads for researchers and evaluators. The paper concludes with insights for those charged with refining centralised ethics review processes, as well as recommendations for future evaluators of complex multi-site programme initiatives.

AB - Increasingly, public sector programmes respond to complex social problems that intersect specific fields and individual disciplines. Such responses result in multi-site initiatives that can span nations, jurisdictions, sectors and organisations. The rigorous evaluation of public sector programmes is now a baseline expectation. For evaluations of large and complex multi-site programme initiatives, the processes of ethics review can present a significant challenge. However in recent years, there have been new developments in centralised ethics review processes in many nations. This paper provides the case study of an evaluation of a national, inter-jurisdictional, cross-sector, aged care health initiative and its encounters with Australian centralised ethics review processes. Specifically, the paper considers progress against the key themes of a previous five-year, five nation study (. Fitzgerald and Phillips, 2006), which found that centralised ethics review processes would save time, money and effort, as well as contribute to more equitable workloads for researchers and evaluators. The paper concludes with insights for those charged with refining centralised ethics review processes, as well as recommendations for future evaluators of complex multi-site programme initiatives.

U2 - 10.1016/j.evalprogplan.2014.12.021

DO - 10.1016/j.evalprogplan.2014.12.021

M3 - Article

VL - 49

SP - 117

EP - 123

JO - Evaluation and Program Planning

JF - Evaluation and Program Planning

SN - 0149-7189

IS - 9

ER -