NHS ethics: Shoe-bombers and why ‘less needs to be more'

Ashok Jansari; Gianna Cocchini; Paul Jenkinson; Ana Bajo; Magdalena Ietswaart

doi:10.1016/j.cortex.2015.06.011

NHS ethics: Shoe-bombers and why ‘less needs to be more'

Ashok Jansari, Gianna Cocchini, Paul Jenkinson, Ana Bajo, Magdalena Ietswaart

Research output: Contribution to journal › Comment/debate › peer-review

3 Citations (Scopus)

73 Downloads (Pure)

Abstract

Neuropsychological research poses several challenges. Some of these, such as developing new ideas and conducting innovative studies, are approached with great enthusiasm, and are an integral and motivating part of academic research. By contrast, other challenges feel like gruelling, near-impossible tasks, designed to test the will of would-be researchers. For many, the process of obtaining UK National Health Service (NHS) ethics approval is the archetypal example of such a task. Baron (this issue) highlights several of the difficulties concerning the ethical review of research involving human subjects, identifying flaws in the current system, and their negative impact on the research process. In this commentary we further reflect on the current system for gaining ethics approval to work with brain-injured patients in the UK, and its implications for neuropsychology research in the UK and beyond

Original language	English
Pages (from-to)	409-411
Journal	Cortex
Volume	71
Early online date	2 Jul 2015
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cortex.2015.06.011
Publication status	Published - Oct 2015

Access to Document

10.1016/j.cortex.2015.06.011

907110
CC-BY-NC-ND
Accepted author manuscript, 23.6 KB

Cite this

@article{a00dd5a4978e480abe93ef69dd041d0f,

title = "NHS ethics: Shoe-bombers and why {\textquoteleft}less needs to be more'",

abstract = "Neuropsychological research poses several challenges. Some of these, such as developing new ideas and conducting innovative studies, are approached with great enthusiasm, and are an integral and motivating part of academic research. By contrast, other challenges feel like gruelling, near-impossible tasks, designed to test the will of would-be researchers. For many, the process of obtaining UK National Health Service (NHS) ethics approval is the archetypal example of such a task. Baron (this issue) highlights several of the difficulties concerning the ethical review of research involving human subjects, identifying flaws in the current system, and their negative impact on the research process. In this commentary we further reflect on the current system for gaining ethics approval to work with brain-injured patients in the UK, and its implications for neuropsychology research in the UK and beyond",

author = "Ashok Jansari and Gianna Cocchini and Paul Jenkinson and Ana Bajo and Magdalena Ietswaart",

note = "CC-BY-NC-ND Date of Acceptance: 16/06/2015",

year = "2015",

month = oct,

doi = "10.1016/j.cortex.2015.06.011",

language = "English",

volume = "71",

pages = "409--411",

journal = "Cortex",

issn = "0010-9452",

publisher = "Masson SpA",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - NHS ethics

T2 - Shoe-bombers and why ‘less needs to be more'

AU - Jansari, Ashok

AU - Cocchini, Gianna

AU - Jenkinson, Paul

AU - Bajo, Ana

AU - Ietswaart, Magdalena

N1 - CC-BY-NC-ND Date of Acceptance: 16/06/2015

PY - 2015/10

Y1 - 2015/10

N2 - Neuropsychological research poses several challenges. Some of these, such as developing new ideas and conducting innovative studies, are approached with great enthusiasm, and are an integral and motivating part of academic research. By contrast, other challenges feel like gruelling, near-impossible tasks, designed to test the will of would-be researchers. For many, the process of obtaining UK National Health Service (NHS) ethics approval is the archetypal example of such a task. Baron (this issue) highlights several of the difficulties concerning the ethical review of research involving human subjects, identifying flaws in the current system, and their negative impact on the research process. In this commentary we further reflect on the current system for gaining ethics approval to work with brain-injured patients in the UK, and its implications for neuropsychology research in the UK and beyond

AB - Neuropsychological research poses several challenges. Some of these, such as developing new ideas and conducting innovative studies, are approached with great enthusiasm, and are an integral and motivating part of academic research. By contrast, other challenges feel like gruelling, near-impossible tasks, designed to test the will of would-be researchers. For many, the process of obtaining UK National Health Service (NHS) ethics approval is the archetypal example of such a task. Baron (this issue) highlights several of the difficulties concerning the ethical review of research involving human subjects, identifying flaws in the current system, and their negative impact on the research process. In this commentary we further reflect on the current system for gaining ethics approval to work with brain-injured patients in the UK, and its implications for neuropsychology research in the UK and beyond

U2 - 10.1016/j.cortex.2015.06.011

DO - 10.1016/j.cortex.2015.06.011

M3 - Comment/debate

SN - 0010-9452

VL - 71

SP - 409

EP - 411

JO - Cortex

JF - Cortex

ER -

NHS ethics: Shoe-bombers and why ‘less needs to be more'

Abstract

Access to Document

Fingerprint

Cite this