Media 1379 views
Informed consent, judicial review and the uncertainties of ethnographic research in sensitive NHS settings
David Hughes
SAGE Research Methods Cases (Online Collection)
Swansea University Author: David Hughes
Full text not available from this repository: check for access using links below.
DOI (Published version): 10.4135/9781526431561
Abstract
This c'tale from the field' describes events affecting a study of an NHS panel responsible for deciding whether to fund high-cost drugs when the Local Health Board asked the researchers to release audio-recorded data because of an impending judicial review case. Judicial review involves th...
Published in: | SAGE Research Methods Cases (Online Collection) |
---|---|
ISBN: | 9781526431561 |
Published: |
London
Sage
2018
|
URI: | https://cronfa.swan.ac.uk/Record/cronfa33668 |
first_indexed |
2017-05-13T12:33:19Z |
---|---|
last_indexed |
2020-10-22T02:44:24Z |
id |
cronfa33668 |
recordtype |
SURis |
fullrecord |
<?xml version="1.0"?><rfc1807><datestamp>2020-10-21T11:40:56.2835494</datestamp><bib-version>v2</bib-version><id>33668</id><entry>2017-05-13</entry><title>Informed consent, judicial review and the uncertainties of ethnographic research in sensitive NHS settings</title><swanseaauthors><author><sid>f1fbd458e3c75d8b597c0ac8036f2b88</sid><firstname>David</firstname><surname>Hughes</surname><name>David Hughes</name><active>true</active><ethesisStudent>false</ethesisStudent></author></swanseaauthors><date>2017-05-13</date><abstract>This c'tale from the field' describes events affecting a study of an NHS panel responsible for deciding whether to fund high-cost drugs when the Local Health Board asked the researchers to release audio-recorded data because of an impending judicial review case. Judicial review involves the legal scrutiny of administrative decisions to decide whether they are lawful. The LHB's request raised ethical issues about whether the terms of research ethics committee approval had been respected and the position of subjects protected, but also issues concerning the university's and researchers' obligations. Various constraints arose from the Data Protection Act 1998, contractual obligations to the Department of Health as funder, and risks to the university and researcher arising from the impending court proceedings. The case describes how possible release of data was negotiated with the various stakeholders, the process via which subjects were asked to permit release, the position of the university administration and its legal advisors, and how data were eventually passed to the LHB. The chapter discusses the dilemmas that emerged, and how pressures from stakeholders make it very difficult for researchers to formulate a principled position not to release data. Lessons learned and possible solutions discussed, including whether risks need to be communicated more clearly to subjects and what steps can be taken to avoid holding compromising data.</abstract><type>Digital or visual media</type><journal>SAGE Research Methods Cases (Online Collection)</journal><publisher>Sage</publisher><placeOfPublication>London</placeOfPublication><isbnElectronic>9781526431561</isbnElectronic><keywords>ethics, ethnography, judicial review, sensitive research, NHS, rationing, individual patient commissioning</keywords><publishedDay>1</publishedDay><publishedMonth>1</publishedMonth><publishedYear>2018</publishedYear><publishedDate>2018-01-01</publishedDate><doi>10.4135/9781526431561</doi><url/><notes>Edited by Nathan Emmerich</notes><college>COLLEGE NANME</college><CollegeCode>COLLEGE CODE</CollegeCode><institution>Swansea University</institution><apcterm/><lastEdited>2020-10-21T11:40:56.2835494</lastEdited><Created>2017-05-13T09:42:17.3160606</Created><path><level id="1">Faculty of Medicine, Health and Life Sciences</level><level id="2">School of Health and Social Care - Public Health</level></path><authors><author><firstname>David</firstname><surname>Hughes</surname><order>1</order></author></authors><documents/><OutputDurs/></rfc1807> |
spelling |
2020-10-21T11:40:56.2835494 v2 33668 2017-05-13 Informed consent, judicial review and the uncertainties of ethnographic research in sensitive NHS settings f1fbd458e3c75d8b597c0ac8036f2b88 David Hughes David Hughes true false 2017-05-13 This c'tale from the field' describes events affecting a study of an NHS panel responsible for deciding whether to fund high-cost drugs when the Local Health Board asked the researchers to release audio-recorded data because of an impending judicial review case. Judicial review involves the legal scrutiny of administrative decisions to decide whether they are lawful. The LHB's request raised ethical issues about whether the terms of research ethics committee approval had been respected and the position of subjects protected, but also issues concerning the university's and researchers' obligations. Various constraints arose from the Data Protection Act 1998, contractual obligations to the Department of Health as funder, and risks to the university and researcher arising from the impending court proceedings. The case describes how possible release of data was negotiated with the various stakeholders, the process via which subjects were asked to permit release, the position of the university administration and its legal advisors, and how data were eventually passed to the LHB. The chapter discusses the dilemmas that emerged, and how pressures from stakeholders make it very difficult for researchers to formulate a principled position not to release data. Lessons learned and possible solutions discussed, including whether risks need to be communicated more clearly to subjects and what steps can be taken to avoid holding compromising data. Digital or visual media SAGE Research Methods Cases (Online Collection) Sage London 9781526431561 ethics, ethnography, judicial review, sensitive research, NHS, rationing, individual patient commissioning 1 1 2018 2018-01-01 10.4135/9781526431561 Edited by Nathan Emmerich COLLEGE NANME COLLEGE CODE Swansea University 2020-10-21T11:40:56.2835494 2017-05-13T09:42:17.3160606 Faculty of Medicine, Health and Life Sciences School of Health and Social Care - Public Health David Hughes 1 |
title |
Informed consent, judicial review and the uncertainties of ethnographic research in sensitive NHS settings |
spellingShingle |
Informed consent, judicial review and the uncertainties of ethnographic research in sensitive NHS settings David Hughes |
title_short |
Informed consent, judicial review and the uncertainties of ethnographic research in sensitive NHS settings |
title_full |
Informed consent, judicial review and the uncertainties of ethnographic research in sensitive NHS settings |
title_fullStr |
Informed consent, judicial review and the uncertainties of ethnographic research in sensitive NHS settings |
title_full_unstemmed |
Informed consent, judicial review and the uncertainties of ethnographic research in sensitive NHS settings |
title_sort |
Informed consent, judicial review and the uncertainties of ethnographic research in sensitive NHS settings |
author_id_str_mv |
f1fbd458e3c75d8b597c0ac8036f2b88 |
author_id_fullname_str_mv |
f1fbd458e3c75d8b597c0ac8036f2b88_***_David Hughes |
author |
David Hughes |
author2 |
David Hughes |
format |
Media |
container_title |
SAGE Research Methods Cases (Online Collection) |
publishDate |
2018 |
institution |
Swansea University |
isbn |
9781526431561 |
doi_str_mv |
10.4135/9781526431561 |
publisher |
Sage |
college_str |
Faculty of Medicine, Health and Life Sciences |
hierarchytype |
|
hierarchy_top_id |
facultyofmedicinehealthandlifesciences |
hierarchy_top_title |
Faculty of Medicine, Health and Life Sciences |
hierarchy_parent_id |
facultyofmedicinehealthandlifesciences |
hierarchy_parent_title |
Faculty of Medicine, Health and Life Sciences |
department_str |
School of Health and Social Care - Public Health{{{_:::_}}}Faculty of Medicine, Health and Life Sciences{{{_:::_}}}School of Health and Social Care - Public Health |
document_store_str |
0 |
active_str |
0 |
description |
This c'tale from the field' describes events affecting a study of an NHS panel responsible for deciding whether to fund high-cost drugs when the Local Health Board asked the researchers to release audio-recorded data because of an impending judicial review case. Judicial review involves the legal scrutiny of administrative decisions to decide whether they are lawful. The LHB's request raised ethical issues about whether the terms of research ethics committee approval had been respected and the position of subjects protected, but also issues concerning the university's and researchers' obligations. Various constraints arose from the Data Protection Act 1998, contractual obligations to the Department of Health as funder, and risks to the university and researcher arising from the impending court proceedings. The case describes how possible release of data was negotiated with the various stakeholders, the process via which subjects were asked to permit release, the position of the university administration and its legal advisors, and how data were eventually passed to the LHB. The chapter discusses the dilemmas that emerged, and how pressures from stakeholders make it very difficult for researchers to formulate a principled position not to release data. Lessons learned and possible solutions discussed, including whether risks need to be communicated more clearly to subjects and what steps can be taken to avoid holding compromising data. |
published_date |
2018-01-01T06:58:57Z |
_version_ |
1827367170822111232 |
score |
11.05492 |