<?xml version="1.0"?>
<metadata xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"><dc:title>Research ethics systems, processes, and awareness across Europe</dc:title><dc:creator>Bockhold,	Sophie	(Avtor)
	</dc:creator><dc:creator>McNulty,	Jonathan P.	(Avtor)
	</dc:creator><dc:creator>Abdurakman,	Edwin	(Avtor)
	</dc:creator><dc:creator>Bezzina,	Paul	(Avtor)
	</dc:creator><dc:creator>Drey,	Nicholas	(Avtor)
	</dc:creator><dc:creator>England,	Andrew	(Avtor)
	</dc:creator><dc:creator>Flinton,	David	(Avtor)
	</dc:creator><dc:creator>Khine,	Ricardo	(Avtor)
	</dc:creator><dc:creator>McEntee,	Mark F.	(Avtor)
	</dc:creator><dc:creator>Mekiš,	Nejc	(Avtor)
	</dc:creator><dc:subject>research ethics</dc:subject><dc:subject>radiography</dc:subject><dc:subject>education and training</dc:subject><dc:subject>challenges</dc:subject><dc:subject>improvements</dc:subject><dc:description>Introduction: The Radiography Research Ethics Standards for Europe (RRESFE) project aims to provide a cross-sectional snapshot of current research ethics systems, processes, and awareness of such, across Europe together with identifying the associated challenges, education, and training needs.
Methods: A cross-sectional online survey targeting radiography researchers in Europe was conducted. Data collection took place between April 26 and July 12, 2021, using a snowball sampling approach. Descriptive and analytical statistics were used to identify trends in research ethics frameworks across Europe.
Results: 285 responses were received across 33 European and 23 non-European countries. Most (n ¼ 221; 95%) European respondents stated ethics approval is required before commencing research in their country. Requirements around research ethics approval and awareness of such requirements varied by European region (X2 (2, n ¼ 129) ¼ 7.234, p ¼ 0.013) and were found to differ depending on the type of research participant and study design. Additionally, European respondents reported ethics approval is a national requirement more often than their non-European counterparts (X2 (1, n ¼ 282) ¼ 4.316, p ¼ 0.049). Requirements for ethics approval were also associated with the undergraduate programme duration (2-year vs. 3-year vs. 3.5 year vs. 4-year vs. multiple programme durations; X2 (4, n ¼ 231) ¼ 10.075, p ¼ 0.016) and availability of postgraduate training (postgraduate training available vs. postgraduate training not available; X2 (1, n ¼ 231) ¼ 15.448, p ¼ &lt;0.001) within respondents’ country.
Conclusion: Respondents from countries with longer programme durations/availability of multiple programme lengths, availability of postgraduate training, and establishment of European Qualifications Framework Level 6 were generally associated with less uncertainty and more comprehensive research ethics requirements.
</dc:description><dc:date>2022</dc:date><dc:date>2022-08-26 03:46:25</dc:date><dc:type>Članek v reviji</dc:type><dc:identifier>138930</dc:identifier><dc:identifier>UDK: 616-073.7:001.891</dc:identifier><dc:identifier>ISSN pri članku: 1078-8174</dc:identifier><dc:identifier>DOI: 10.1016/j.radi.2022.07.002</dc:identifier><dc:identifier>COBISS_ID: 119198211</dc:identifier><dc:language>sl</dc:language></metadata>
