In the reading for this week, “It’s like Tuskegee in reverse”: A case study of ethical tensions in institutional review board review of community-based participatory research, the authors state the following:
“The US Department of Health and Human Services’ IRB Guidebook says that human subjects are individuals whose physiological or behavioral characteristics and responses are the object of study in a research project. But the object of our study was to assess institutional practices within a community, not the responses of individuals within those institutions – a distinction the IRB dismissed as irrelevant but that we believe is worthy of further consideration because of the increasing interest in CBPR and the increasing influence of global institutions on local communities.”
Do you agree with the authors’ assertion? Why or why not?
Delivering a high-quality product at a reasonable price is not enough anymore.
That’s why we have developed 5 beneficial guarantees that will make your experience with our service enjoyable, easy, and safe.
You have to be 100% sure of the quality of your product to give a money-back guarantee. This describes us perfectly. Make sure that this guarantee is totally transparent.
Read moreEach paper is composed from scratch, according to your instructions. It is then checked by our plagiarism-detection software. There is no gap where plagiarism could squeeze in.
Read moreThanks to our free revisions, there is no way for you to be unsatisfied. We will work on your paper until you are completely happy with the result.
Read moreYour email is safe, as we store it according to international data protection rules. Your bank details are secure, as we use only reliable payment systems.
Read moreBy sending us your money, you buy the service we provide. Check out our terms and conditions if you prefer business talks to be laid out in official language.
Read more
Recent Comments