Participatory action research: a protective research design

Details

• Personal Author:
  Lipscomb, Jane A. ; McPhaul K
• Description:
  This commentary briefly reviews the ethical considerations for protection of workers participating in research. We argue that many IRBs may not fully understand the nature of collaborative and participatory research methods; consequently, this may delay IRB approval or worse, reduce the effectiveness of IRB oversight. A U.S. workplace participatory action research (PAR) project with which we are involved illustrates how researcher-worker-employer teams can navigate human subject oversight procedures (IRB approval). By design, successful and effective PAR projects incorporate, and often exceed the ethical principles espoused by current IRB principles. [Description provided by NIOSH]
• Subjects:
  Men Occupational Health Personal Protective Equipment Safety Women
• Keywords:
  Humans Protective-measures Workers
• ISSN:
  1048-2911
• Document Type:
  Text
• Funding:
  Grant
• Genre:
  Journal Article
• Place as Subject:
  Maryland ; OSHA Region 3
• CIO:
  National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH)
• Topic:
  Workplace Safety & Health
• Location:
  North America
• Pages in Document:
  53-59
• Volume:
  15
• Issue:
  1
• NIOSHTIC Number:
  nn:20042118
• Citation:
  New Solut 2005 Jan; 15(1):53-59
• Federal Fiscal Year:
  2005
• Performing Organization:
  University of Maryland - School of Nursing - Baltimore
• Peer Reviewed:
  True
• Start Date:
  20020930
• Source Full Name:
  New Solutions: A Journal of Environmental and Occupational Health Policy
• End Date:
  20090929
• Collection(s):
  National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health
• Main Document Checksum:
  urn:sha-512:193d7af0874875bb214c12184d6339a6127f609b55aa0205a8dfddd2e9c5ac0d01661a54b96ee79769889676566dab5c42f00580098de202aa2e3ffd69d61fe7
• Download URL:
  https://stacks.cdc.gov/view/cdc/194443/cdc_194443_DS1.pdf
• File Type:
  [PDF - 53.87 KB ]