"Community 101 for researchers": an online training program to build capacity for ethical community-engaged research with Native Hawaiians and Pacific Islanders.

To address the history of unethical research and community distrust in research among Native Hawaiian and Pacific Islander communities, we developed the "Community 101 for Researchers" training program, which was launched in 2014 to enhance the capacity of researchers to engage in ethical community-engaged research. The purpose of this paper is to describe the development of this training program as well as its reach and feedback from participants. The Community 101 training program is a self-paced, 2-h online training program featuring community-engaged researchers from the University of Hawai'i and their longstanding community partners. Throughout the five modules, we highlight the historical context of Native Hawaiians and Pacific Islander populations in Hawai'i related to research ethics and use examples from the community as well as our own research projects that integrate community ethics, relevance, benefits, and input. To determine reach and gather participant feedback on the training, we extracted data from the user accounts. The training has been completed by 697 users to-date since its launch. Despite very little advertisement, an average of nearly 70 users have completed the Community 101 Program each year. The majority of the participants were located in Hawai'i though participants were also from other states and territories in the US, and international locations. The majority of participants were from universities in Hawai'i in 51 different departments demonstrating multidisciplinary relevance of the program's training. The general feedback from the 96 participants who completed an optional anonymous evaluation survey given at the end of the training was positive. The "Community 101 for Researchers" Training program is an accessible and relevant tool that can be used to advance ethical community engaged research, specifically with Native Hawaiian and Pacific Islander communities.

Social Work Is a Human Rights Profession.

As defined by the International Federation of Social Workers, social work is a human rights profession. This is explicitly stated in the professional codes of ethics in many nations. However, the most recent version of the Code of Ethics of the National Association of Social Workers continues to exclude any mention of human rights, fitting in with the history of U.S. exceptionalism on this subject. Social workers around the world have a long history of working for the achievement of human rights, including an explicit grounding of practice in human rights principles: human dignity, nondiscrimination, participation, transparency, and accountability. Utilizing these principles, U.S. social workers can move from the deficit model of the needs-based approach to competently contextualizing individual issues in their larger human rights framework. In this way, social work can address larger social problems and make way for the concurrent achievement of human rights. This article explains these principles and provides a case example of how to apply them in practice.

Science, Technology and Innovation as Social Goods for Development: Rethinking Research Capacity Building from Sen's Capabilities Approach.

Science and technology are key to economic and social development, yet the capacity for scientific innovation remains globally unequally distributed. Although a priority for development cooperation, building or developing research capacity is often reduced in practice to promoting knowledge transfers, for example through North-South partnerships. Research capacity building/development tends to focus on developing scientists' technical competencies through training, without parallel investments to develop and sustain the socioeconomic and political structures that facilitate knowledge creation. This, the paper argues, significantly contributes to the scientific divide between developed and developing countries more than any skills shortage. Using Charles Taylor's concept of irreducibly social goods, the paper extends Sen's Capabilities Approach beyond its traditional focus on individual entitlements to present a view of scientific knowledge as a social good and the capability to produce it as a social capability. Expanding this capability requires going beyond current fragmented approaches to research capacity building to holistically strengthen the different social, political and economic structures that make up a nation's innovation system. This has implications for the interpretation of human rights instruments beyond their current focus on access to knowledge and for focusing science policy and global research partnerships to design approaches to capacity building/development beyond individual training/skills building.

Applying a global justice lens to health systems research ethics: an initial exploration.

Recent scholarship has considered what, if anything, rich people owe to poor people to achieve justice in global health and the implications of this for international research. Yet this work has primarily focused on international clinical research. Health systems research is increasingly being performed in low and middle income countries and is essential to reducing global health disparities. This paper provides an initial description of the ethical issues related to priority setting, capacity-building, and the provision of post-study benefits that arise during the conduct of such research. It presents a selection of issues discussed in the health systems research literature and argues that they constitute ethical concerns based on their being inconsistent with a particular theory of global justice (the health capability paradigm). Issues identified include the fact that priority setting for health systems research at the global level is often not driven by national priorities and that capacity-building efforts frequently utilize one-size-fits-all approaches.

Pharmaceuticalisation and ethical review in South Asia: issues of scope and authority for practitioners and policy makers.

Ethical review by expert committee continues to be the first line of defence when it comes to protecting human subjects recruited into clinical trials. Drawing on a large scale study of biomedical experimentation across South Asia, and specifically on interviews with 24 ethical review committee [ERC] members across India, Sri Lanka and Nepal, this article identifies some of the tensions that emerge for ERC members as the capacity to conduct credible ethical review of clinical trials is developed across the region. The article draws attention to fundamental issues of scope and authority in the operation of ethical review. On the one hand, ERC members experience a powerful pull towards harmonisation and a strong alignment with international standards deemed necessary for the global pharmaceutical assemblage to consolidate and extend. On the other hand, they must deal with what is in effect the double jeopardy of ethical review in developing world contexts. ERC members must undertake review but are frequently made aware of their responsibility to protect interests that go beyond the 'human subject' and into the realms of development and national interest [for example, in relation to literacy and informed consent]. These dilemmas are indicative of broader questions about where ethical review sits in institutional terms and how it might develop to best ensure improved human subject protection given growth of industry-led research.

A road map to building ethics capacity in the home and community care and support services sector.

There are unique ethical issues that arise in home and community care because of its locus and range of service. However, the academic literature on ethical issues in the sector of home and community care and support remains minimal. Opportunities for education, collaboration and exchange among professionals and care providers are also severely limited. Although the proposed solution of developing ethics capacity in the home care setting is over 20 years old, only modest progress had been made until recently. This article introduces the Community Ethics Network (CEN), a replicable network of home and community care agencies in the Greater Toronto Area. Its achievements can be attributed to a commitment to work toward a common approach to ethical decision-making and to a focus on education, case reviews and policy development. CEN has produced numerous positive outcomes; key among these is the development and delivery of standardized training on ethics to more than 2,000 front-line staff of diverse backgrounds/professions and representing over 40 different organizations.

Ethics in global surgery.

Global surgery, while historically a small niche, is becoming a larger part of the global health enterprise. This article discusses the burden of global surgery, emphasizing the importance of addressing surgical needs in low- and middle-income countries. It describes the barriers to surgical care in the developing world, the ethical challenges that these barriers create, and strategies to overcome these barriers. It emphasizes the crucial role of preparation for global surgical interventions as a way to maximize benefits as well as minimize harms and ethical challenges. It ends with the cautionary statement that preparation does not eliminate ethical problems, so surgical volunteers must be prepared not only for the technical challenges of global surgery but also for the ethical challenges.

Building surgical capacity in low-resource countries: a qualitative analysis of task shifting from surgeon volunteers' perspectives.

INTRODUCTION: Surgical volunteer organizations (SVOs) focus considerable resources on addressing the backlog of cases in low-resource countries. This model of service may perpetuate dependency. Efforts should focus on models that establish independence in providing surgical care. Independence could be achieved through surgical capacity building. However, there has been scant discussion in literature on SVO involvement in surgical capacity building. METHODS: Using qualitative methods, we evaluated the perspectives of surgeons with extensive volunteer experience in low-resource countries. We collected data through in-depth interviews that centered on SVOs using task shifting as a tool for surgical capacity building. RESULTS: Some of the key themes from our analysis include the ethical ramifications of task shifting, the challenges of addressing technical and clinical education in capacity building for low-resource settings, and the allocation of limited volunteer resources toward surgical capacity building. CONCLUSION: These themes will be the foundation of subsequent studies that will focus on other stakeholders in surgical capacity building including host communities and SVO administrators.

Creating research capacity through a tribally based institutional review board.

Tribal groups work tirelessly to maintain sovereignty rights, preserving and upholding tribal authority and protection over their land, people, businesses, and health. Moreover, the conduct of health science research by outsiders has had its share of an unethical, misguided, and abusive past. Tribally based institutional review boards (IRBs) are addressing these issues in an effort to control new health science research, set their own research agenda, and protect their people in the same spirit as has been accomplished through the perpetuation of sovereignty rights. We describe the success of a tribally based IRB at creating new capacity for health research and enhanced levels of trust, including bidirectional cultural education between academic researchers and tribal IRB committee members.

Adopting an ethical approach to global health training: the evolution of the Botswana - University of Pennsylvania partnership.

Global health training opportunities for medical students and residents have proliferated in recent years. These short-term elective rotations allow trainees to learn about global health issues by participating in various aspects of education and health care in resource-limited settings. Recently published consensus-based ethical guidelines have suggested considerations for the design of international electives that address the activities of host and sending sites, visiting students and residents, and sponsors.The authors analyze the value of global health training opportunities for medical students, residents, faculty, host and sending institutions, and other stakeholders from the perspective of the Botswana-University of Pennsylvania Partnership, a program that has provided global health experiences for health care trainees for more than 10 years. Drawing from the Working Group on Ethics Guidelines for Global Health Training framework, they illustrate the ethical and logistical challenges faced by the program's organizers and the solutions that they implemented alongside their host site partners. They conclude with a summary of recommendations to guide implementation of ethically sound international health electives in resource-limited settings.

Diversidade / Diversity

Nesta edição, o programa Você em Foco recebeu Ismênia Pires, coordenadora de recrutamento e seleção, para falar sobre diversidade. O mercado de trabalho atual é caracterizado pela diversidade que caracteriza as pessoas que nele atuam. A política de cotas e a reserva de vagas para deficientes são exemplos de ações afirmativas que contribuem para o desenvolvimento profissional. É fundamental que a nova geração que ingressa no mercado de trabalho não herde preconceitos e estabeleça relacionamentos positivos no mercado de trabalho. A diversidade deve ser vivida como um valor. O profissional deve enxergá-la como uma oportunidade de aprendizado. Os servidores que estão deixando o mercado de trabalho possuem a missão de colaborar para um ambiente profissional mais diverso e respeitoso, que sirva como legado para as futuras gerações