東華大學圖書館 |

Language: English

Help

回圖書館首頁

手機版館藏查詢

Back

Switch To: Labeled | MARC Mode | ISBD

Scientific misconduct: Perceptions, ...

Capella University., School of Business.

Linked to FindBook

Google Book

Amazon

博客來

Scientific misconduct: Perceptions, beliefs, working environments, and reporting practices in the clinical research associate population.

Record Type:	Language materials, printed : Monograph/item
Title/Author:	Scientific misconduct: Perceptions, beliefs, working environments, and reporting practices in the clinical research associate population./
Author:	Rose, Lori L.
Description:	181 p.
Notes:	Adviser: April B. Wall.
Contained By:	Dissertation Abstracts International69-05B.
Subject:	Health Sciences, General. -
Online resource:	http://pqdd.sinica.edu.tw/twdaoeng/servlet/advanced?query=3304453
ISBN:	9780549537052

Scientific misconduct: Perceptions, beliefs, working environments, and reporting practices in the clinical research associate population.
Rose, Lori L.

Scientific misconduct: Perceptions, beliefs, working environments, and reporting practices in the clinical research associate population. - 181 p.

Adviser: April B. Wall.

Thesis (Ph.D.)--Capella University, 2008.

The purpose of this research study was to survey clinical research associates (CRAs) to obtain information on their attitudes, beliefs, experiences, and reporting practices related to scientific misconduct in clinical trials. This research extended the research conducted by a group of investigators at the University of Alabama (Pryor, E. R., Habermann, B., & Broome, M. E. [in press]. Scientific misconduct from the perspective of research coordinators: A national survey. Journal of Medical Ethics). Data were collected using the Scientific Misconduct Questionnaire-Revised (2), adapted from the questionnaire used by Pryor et al. There were 108 evaluable responders (13.8%) from 783 deliverable surveys sent to CRAs in the Constella Group, LLC, CRA database. Overall, the perceived frequency of misconduct was low except in two areas: protocol violations and adverse event reporting. Observed scientific misconduct by an investigator was reported by 20% of the respondents, and observed misconduct by other research personnel was reported by 17% of the respondents. CRAs with the least experience (0 to 5 years) were more aware of misconduct than more experienced CRAs. CRAs reported misconduct when they observed it, and almost all of them thought their fellow CRAs also would report observed incidents of scientific misconduct. Site environmental influences and individual behavioral influences were perceived to have an impact on scientific misconduct. These findings were exploratory and expanded the body of knowledge on scientific misconduct to the CRA population. However, because of the low response rate, the results are limited in how they can be generalized to the CRA population.

ISBN: 9780549537052Subjects--Topical Terms:

1017817
Health Sciences, General.

Scientific misconduct: Perceptions, beliefs, working environments, and reporting practices in the clinical research associate population.
LDR:02724nam 2200301 a 45 001 856693
005 20100709
008 100709s2008 ||||||||||||||||| ||eng d
020 $a 9780549537052
035 $a (UMI)AAI3304453
035 $a AAI3304453
040 $a UMI $c UMI
100 1 $a Rose, Lori L. $3 1023539
245 1 0 $a Scientific misconduct: Perceptions, beliefs, working environments, and reporting practices in the clinical research associate population.
300 $a 181 p.
500 $a Adviser: April B. Wall.
500 $a Source: Dissertation Abstracts International, Volume: 69-05, Section: B, page: 2883.
502 $a Thesis (Ph.D.)--Capella University, 2008.
520 $a The purpose of this research study was to survey clinical research associates (CRAs) to obtain information on their attitudes, beliefs, experiences, and reporting practices related to scientific misconduct in clinical trials. This research extended the research conducted by a group of investigators at the University of Alabama (Pryor, E. R., Habermann, B., & Broome, M. E. [in press]. Scientific misconduct from the perspective of research coordinators: A national survey. Journal of Medical Ethics). Data were collected using the Scientific Misconduct Questionnaire-Revised (2), adapted from the questionnaire used by Pryor et al. There were 108 evaluable responders (13.8%) from 783 deliverable surveys sent to CRAs in the Constella Group, LLC, CRA database. Overall, the perceived frequency of misconduct was low except in two areas: protocol violations and adverse event reporting. Observed scientific misconduct by an investigator was reported by 20% of the respondents, and observed misconduct by other research personnel was reported by 17% of the respondents. CRAs with the least experience (0 to 5 years) were more aware of misconduct than more experienced CRAs. CRAs reported misconduct when they observed it, and almost all of them thought their fellow CRAs also would report observed incidents of scientific misconduct. Site environmental influences and individual behavioral influences were perceived to have an impact on scientific misconduct. These findings were exploratory and expanded the body of knowledge on scientific misconduct to the CRA population. However, because of the low response rate, the results are limited in how they can be generalized to the CRA population.
590 $a School code: 1351.
650 4 $a Health Sciences, General. $3 1017817
650 4 $a Health Sciences, Public Health. $3 1017659
690 $a 0566
690 $a 0573
710 2 $a Capella University. $b School of Business. $3 1018437
773 0 $t Dissertation Abstracts International $g 69-05B.
790 $a 1351
790 1 0 $a Muchnick, Marc $e committee member
790 1 0 $a Shamoo, Adil $e committee member
790 1 0 $a Wall, April B., $e advisor
791 $a Ph.D.
792 $a 2008
856 4 0 $u http://pqdd.sinica.edu.tw/twdaoeng/servlet/advanced?query=3304453