Collegian 25 (2018) 147–148

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Collegian
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/coll

Editorial

The importance of ethics in research publications

Are nurse researchers reporting in sufficient detail the ethical
issues in their research? In our opinion as journal editors reading
a large number of papers each year, it seems they are not. Rather,
authors draft the ethics section of their manuscript seemingly on
auto pilot. We frequently read manuscripts that give almost no
detail – beyond a statement that ethical approval was obtained –
about what the ethical issues were in the study being reported. This
is a worrying trend. In this editorial, we want to remind readers a
bout why ethical conduct in research is so important and discuss
some of the emerging ethics issues in nursing research.
has decried the length and complexity of ethics application
forms. This, of course, is a mistake; Sellman (2016) argues that
nurses who perceive the ethics application process to be bur-
densome may be doing so as they perceive their research as
self-regarding, as opposed to those who regard others in their
research and engage with their research in the technical way it
needs.
Raising the bar

When discussing ethical considerations in the methods section

The declaration of Helsinki
Research ethics serves to protect the rights of participants
and ensure they are not exposed to unnecessary harm, and
ensure that methodological approaches are appropriate to the
study aims. It was in 1947 that the Nuremberg Code was for-
mulated by American judges in response to horrific human
experimentation by Nazis doctors during World War II. The
Code set out to protect the rights of human research subjects,
unlike those exposed to previous treatments in the aim that
nothing similar ever occurred again. Subsequently, the Decla-
ration of Helsinki developed by the World Medical Association
in various forms since 1964 has provided principles for which
medical research involving humans is to be managed (Shuster,
1997). Regarded as the cornerstone of human research ethics,
the Declaration of Helsinki has had a profound and positive
effect on the conduct of research globally. Violations of human
rights in research have still occurred at different points in
time since that the Declaration commenced (Doody & Noonan,
2016), necessitating researchers to continue to adhere to ethical
codes.
Research ethics in Australia
Nationally, the Australian Code for the Responsible Conduct of
Research (NHMRC/AVCC, 2007) establishes principles and prac-
tice guidelines for the ethical conduct of research. It also manages
any suspected breaches of the code. Other countries have their
own legislative frameworks and guidelines. Human Research Ethics
Committees play a central role in ensuring that research is con-
ducted in an ethical manner, providing valuable feedback and
advice to researchers. The process of achieving ethical approval
can be complex and time consuming and many a researcher
of a paper, it is not sufficient to simply state that the study was
approved by a Human Research Ethics Committee (HREC). Rather,
there is a responsibility on researchers to describe the steps taken
to protect the rights of participants and to minimise the harm they
were exposed to during any study. For example, it is common for
authors to provide little detail about how potential participants
were approached by the research team. Another bug bear is authors
who state that participants gave “written informed consent”, pro-
viding no information about who explained the study, or how much
time potential participants were given to consider participation.
We also see many studies where there is obvious potential for par-
ticipants to feel pressured into taking part, again rarely are these
issues considered by authors. Authors should be challenged by
reviewers and editors to offer a more considered discussion of the
ethical issues in the research they are reporting.
Emerging ethical challenges
Today, researchers are developing new methodological
approaches that raise novel ethical considerations. More research,
for example, is taking place in the social media space, so called
“big data” research. Researchers are drawing on publicly available
data from popular social media platforms or web based forums.
People may have posted questions or given response in public
places, without understanding that their words may be used in
research, and where obtaining informed consent to use postings
may not be possible. Should ethics committees refuse to approach
this type of research? Probably not, big data research can provide
novel insights, for example, into health decision-making. Other
researchers are using social media to recruit participants into
studies. From an ethical standpoint, this is creating new challenges
for researchers.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.colegn.2018.02.006
1322-7696/© 2018 Published by Elsevier Ltd on behalf of Australian College of Nursing Ltd.
148 Editorial / Collegian 25 (2018) 147–148
Research ethics and publication
The emergence of predatory publishing has added a further eth-
ical dimension for researchers to consider. With the promise of fast
publication, predatory publishers are using unethical practices to
merely make money at the expense of the researcher and their
credibility (Darbyshire, McKenna, & Lee, 2017). When researchers
are recruiting for their research, the information sheet provided to
participants indicates that they will publish the findings of their
research in a peer reviewed journal. This may be a contribut-
ing factor as to why people choose to participate in research and
contribute to the generation of new knowledge. If a study is pub-
lished in a predatory journal and possibly not have undergone peer
review, have researchers fulfilled their “contract” with participants
that they would publish their findings?
Parting words
In the context of how ethical research came into being, it is
important for researchers to be aware of their responsibilities in
the ethical conduct and reporting of research, including the man-
ner in which it was conducted. Researchers need to be increasingly
cognisant of contemporary factors impacting on the reporting of
ethical considerations in their research studies. The onus rests
with the researcher to first consider the ‘other’, such as those who
have funded or participated in nursing research, rather than the
researcher’s own need to do the research.
References
Darbyshire, P., McKenna, L., Lee, S. F., & East, C. (2017). Taking a stand against
predatory publishers. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 73(7), 1535–1537.
Doody, O., & Noonan, M. (2016). Nursing research ethics: guidance and application
in practice. British Journal of Nursing, 25(14), 803–807.
NHMRC/AVCC. (2007). Australian code for the responsible conduct of research.
Canberra: Commonwealth of Australia [https://www.nhmrc.gov.au/ files
nhmrc/file/research/research-integrity/r39 australian code responsible
conduct research 150811.pdf]
Sellman, D. (2016). The practice of nursing research: getting ready for ‘ethics’ and
the matter of character. Nursing Inquiry, 23, 24–31.
Shuster, E. (1997). Fifty years later: the significance of the Nuremberg Code. New
England Journal of Medicine, 337(20), 1436–1440.
Lisa McKenna ∗
Richard Gray ∗
School of Nursing and Midwifery, La Trobe
University, Australia
∗ Corresponding author.