Search

Purpose: United States healthcare systems have enacted varied adolescent online patient portal policies. No prior work has established whether these policies are acceptable to adolescents and parents., Methods: Mixed-method Delphi approach with 18 parents and 18 adolescents with and without chronic illness. We presented 19 policies related to (1) who can access different types of information through the portal; (2) timing of results release; and (3) portal messaging policies, such as whether individuals are charged for portal messages. Panelists voted on whether they "supported," "could live with," or "opposed" each policy., Results: Thirty-six panelists completed surveys with no attrition. For access-related policies, panelists opposed prohibiting parent or adolescent access, and they accepted policies that provided transparent access to sensitive and nonsensitive information for parents and adolescents. Panelists failed to reach consensus about whether adolescents should have the granular ability to determine which parts of the medical record their parents can see. For policies related to timing of release, panelists found either immediate or delayed access to results to be acceptable, although more panelists supported immediate access. For portal messaging policies, panelists supported the ability of parents and adolescents to send messages and opposed being charged for portal messages. Panelists found it acceptable for adolescents to see messages written by their parents, but failed to reach consensus on whether parents should see messages written by adolescents., Discussion: Some healthcare systems have implemented adolescent portal policies that panelists opposed or found concerning. Hospital leaders should consider these data as they re-evaluate institutional policies., (Copyright © 2024 Society for Adolescent Health and Medicine. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Serious and continuing research noncompliance and integrity violations undermine the quality of research and trust in science. When researchers engage in these behaviors, institutional officials (IOs) often develop corrective action plans. Ideally, such plans address the root causes so noncompliance or research integrity violations discontinue. The aim of this study was to identify what IOs perceive as causes and action plan activities typically prescribed. We conducted semi-structured in-depth interviews with 47 IOs at research institutions across the U.S. including: institutional review board and institutional animal care and use committee chairs and directors, chief research officers, research compliance and integrity officers, and institutional conflicts of interest chairs and directors. The most common root causes identified were: 1) lack of knowledge or training, 2) failure to provide research team supervision, and 3) researcher attitudes toward compliance. The most common action plan activities include: 1) retraining in compliance or research integrity, 2) follow-up and hands-on involvement with the researcher, and 3) mandated oversight or mentoring. Because the most commonly identified action plan activities fail to adequately address the majority of root causes, our findings suggest a need for IOs to rethink existing approaches to action plan development to more effectively target root causes.

Background: Effective leadership and management practices contribute to responsible, high-quality research and the well-being of team members. We describe the development and initial validation of a measure assessing principal investigators' leadership and management practices and a measure of research team practices., Methods: Using a cross-sectional survey design, 570 postdoctoral researchers funded by the National Institutes of Health reported on the perceived behaviors of their principal investigator (PI) and the research team. The PI leadership and management items factored into two dimensions: fostering relationships and directing research., Results: Correlations of these new scales with existing, validated measures of ethical leadership and general leader behavior provided evidence of convergent validity. Providing evidence for criterion-related validity, scores on the new measures predicted lab climate for research ethics, self-reported productivity, and job satisfaction. Research team practices provided additional predictive value beyond leadership and management behaviors., Conclusions: This study provides construct validity evidence for the new Leadership and Management in Science (LAMPS) Measure and the Research Team Practices (RTP) Measure. Qualitative responses to an open-ended item reinforced the importance of relationships and directive supervision for a positive environment. These measures can be useful tools for future research or may be useful for PIs seeking feedback about their practices.

Objective: To identify perceived benefits, problems, facilitators, and barriers to adolescent online patient portal use., Study Design: Qualitative, semi-structured interviews with dyads of parents and adolescents with or without chronic illness. The study team purposively sampled for racial and ethnic minorities and fathers. Three team members then performed thematic analysis of the transcripts, with subsequent dyadic analysis of themes represented by related parents and adolescents., Results: We performed 102 interviews with 51 dyads of parents and adolescents (26 with chronic illness, 25 without chronic illness). Nearly all participants believed that adolescents should be permitted portal access. We identified 4 themes related to portal benefits: improves adolescent's knowledge of health; supports medical self-management and autonomy; strengthens communication and relationships; and supports parental influence. We identified 4 themes related to portal problems: misunderstanding or confusion; emotional distress; strain on relationships; and irresponsible use of portal. Facilitators of portal use included severity of illness, adolescent's curiosity, and ease of technology use. Barriers included lack of awareness or interest, complexity of information, and access difficulties. Twenty adolescents (39%) did not know they could access the portal, and 23 (45%) lacked interest in portals. Parents and adolescents seldom used the portal as a collaborative tool, and instead were engaging with the portal independently., Conclusion: Parents and adolescents perceive several benefits and problems with portal use, but many adolescents lack interest in using portals. Adolescent portals represent an underutilized resource to engage adolescents in their care., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest The authors declare no conflicts of interest., (Copyright © 2024 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objectives: Patient engagement is critical for the effective development and use of artificial intelligence (AI)-enabled tools in learning health systems (LHSs). We adapted a previously validated measure from pediatrics to assess adults' openness and concerns about the use of AI in their healthcare., Study Design: Cross-sectional survey., Methods: We adapted the 33-item "Attitudes toward Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare for Parents" measure for administration to adults in the general US population (AAIH-A), recruiting participants through Amazon's Mechanical Turk (MTurk) crowdsourcing platform. AAIH-A assesses openness to AI-driven technologies and includes 7 subscales assessing participants' openness and concerns about these technologies. The openness scale includes examples of AI-driven tools for diagnosis, prediction, treatment selection, and medical guidance. Concern subscales assessed privacy, social justice, quality, human element of care, cost, shared decision-making, and convenience. We co-administered previously validated measures hypothesized to correlate with openness. We conducted a confirmatory factor analysis and assessed reliability and construct validity. We performed exploratory multivariable regression models to identify predictors of openness., Results: A total of 379 participants completed the survey. Confirmatory factor analysis confirmed the seven dimensions of the concerns, and the scales had internal consistency reliability, and correlated as hypothesized with existing measures of trust and faith in technology. Multivariable models indicated that trust in technology and concerns about quality and convenience were significantly associated with openness., Conclusions: The AAIH-A is a brief measure that can be used to assess adults' perspectives about AI-driven technologies in healthcare and LHSs. The use of AAIH-A can inform future development and implementation of AI-enabled tools for patient care in the LHS context that engage patients as key stakeholders., Competing Interests: All authors have read and approved the final manuscript and do not declare any conflicts of interest., (© 2024 The Authors. Learning Health Systems published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of University of Michigan.)

Background : A person's cultural background shapes how they interpret and navigate problems. Given that large numbers of international researchers work and train in the U.S. we sought to better understand how researchers use the decision-making strategy of seeking help to navigate ethical and professional challenges. Methods : Participants ( N  = 300) were researchers working or training in the U.S. who were born in East Asia (EA) or born in the U.S. They completed a screening survey; then a subset completed think-aloud interviews ( n  = 66) focused on how they would respond to three hypothetical research scenarios. Results : Thematic analysis of the transcripts showed that seeking help was a commonly endorsed strategy, with some nuances between groups. Themes included seeking help in the form of getting advice, seeking someone to help solve the problem, and gathering information. Endorsement of the seeking help strategy frequently depended on participants' relationships; desiring to seek help from people they trusted. Notably, EA participants tended to prefer seeking help in ways that avoided reputational harm to others. Conclusion : A better understanding of how researchers from different cultural backgrounds use decision-making strategies can inform how to make educational programs more inclusive and comprehensive to more effectively develop researchers' ethical and professional decision-making skills.

Background: Web-based patient portals are tools that could support adolescents in managing their health and developing autonomy. However, informatics administrators must navigate competing interests when developing portal access policies for adolescents and their parents., Objective: We aimed to assess the perspectives of informatics administrators on guiding principles for the development of web-based health care portal access policies in adolescent health care., Methods: We interviewed informatics administrators from US hospitals with ≥50 dedicated pediatric beds. We performed a thematic analysis of guiding principles for developing and implementing adolescent portal access policies., Results: We interviewed 65 informatics leaders who represented 63 pediatric hospitals, 58 health care systems, 29 states, and 14,379 pediatric hospital beds. Participants described 9 guiding principles related to three overarching themes: (1) balancing confidentiality and other care needs, (2) balancing simplicity and granularity, and (3) collaborating and advocating. Participants described the central importance of prioritizing the health and safety of the adolescent while also complying with state and federal laws. However, there were differing beliefs about how to prioritize health and safety and what role parents should play in supporting the adolescent's health care. Participants also identified areas where clinicians and institutions can advocate for adolescents, especially with electronic health record vendors and legislators., Conclusions: Informatics administrators provided guiding principles for adolescent portal access policies that aimed to balance the competing needs of adolescent confidentiality and the usefulness of the portal. Portal access policies must prioritize the adolescent's health and safety while complying with state and federal laws. However, institutions must determine how to best enact these principles. Institutions and clinicians should strive for consensus on principles to strengthen advocacy efforts with institutional leadership, electronic health record vendors, and lawmakers., (©Bryan Sisk, Alison L Antes, Christine Bereitschaft, Madi Enloe, Fabienne Bourgeois, James DuBois. Originally published in JMIR Pediatrics and Parenting (https://pediatrics.jmir.org), 11.03.2024.)

Background: There are notable differences in how adult patients with traumatic brachial plexus injuries (BPI) are evaluated and treated., Purpose: To better understand existing philosophies, we used the Delphi method to measure and foster consensus on routine use of electrodiagnostic testing, ultrasound, magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), and computed tomography (CT) myelograms prior to surgery. Panelists were 10 peripheral nerve surgeons board certified in their respective specialties at 5 academic medical centers in the United States., Methods: We presented 2 cases (1 complete/pan-BPI and 1 upper trunk BPI) to panelists and asked how often they would order the following preoperative diagnostic tests: electrodiagnostic studies; ultrasound of the brachial plexus; MRI of the brachial plexus; CT myelogram. Our Delphi process included an initial survey with videoconference discussion after the first round. A second survey/videoconference round was conducted to further probe the items that did not reach consensus during the first round., Results: Among the 10 surgeons, there was consensus that prior to brachial plexus surgery electrodiagnostic studies and MRI should be routinely ordered and ultrasound of the brachial plexus should not be routinely ordered. The group did not reach consensus on whether CT myelogram should or should not be routinely ordered., Conclusions: Based on our panel's discussion, future work should focus on comparing the accuracy of CT myelogram and MRI for evaluation of cervical nerve root presence and viability., Competing Interests: The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article., (© The Author(s) 2024.)

Importance: Many health care systems offer adolescents access to health information through online patient portals, but few studies have explored how to engage adolescents in using and benefiting from online portals., Objective: To determine how US children's hospitals have attempted to encourage adolescent portal use, barriers to engaging adolescents, and ideal future goals for engagement., Design, Setting, and Participants: This qualitative study performed structured qualitative interviews with informatics administrators from children's hospitals across the US between February and July 2022. Informatics administrators were employed by US health care systems that managed a children's hospital with at least 50 dedicated pediatrics beds. Data analysis was performed from November 2022 to January 2023., Main Outcomes and Measures: This study used thematic analysis of (1) current steps that health care systems had taken to engage adolescents in using their online patient portals and (2) barriers to engaging adolescents and ideal future goals and outcomes of engagement., Results: Among 58 total interviews with 65 informatics administrators who represented 63 hospitals across 58 health care systems, 6 themes of approaches to engaging adolescents in portal use were identified: (1) promoting and educating adolescents about portal enrollment, (2) establishing workflows to support enrollment, (3) seeking and incorporating feedback, (4) creating a culture or environment supporting engagement, (5) increasing portal utility, and (6) limited efforts. Barriers to engaging adolescents in portal use related to either (1) stakeholder investment, interest, and capabilities or (2) intersecting technical, ethical, and legal factors. Participants identified 4 ideal future efforts to engage adolescents: (1) develop adaptable private means of communication with adolescents, (2) use adolescent-centric user design, (3) enhance promotion and education about portal use, and (4) simplify and adapt workflows to encourage enrollment. Participants described 3 ideal outcomes of this future engagement: (1) provide education about current health, (2) prepare for transition to adulthood, and (3) improve digital health education of adolescents., Conclusions and Relevance: In this qualitative study of informatics administrators, children's hospitals across the US were found to have varying degrees of efforts to engage adolescents in using their portals. Most of these efforts focused on supporting adolescent enrollment, but fewer efforts focused on making the portal useful and interesting to adolescents.

Background: After enactment of the 21st Century Cures Act, many health care systems offer adolescents and parents access to electronic health information through online portals. Few studies have evaluated adolescent portal access policies since the implementation of the Cures Act., Methods: We performed structured interviews with informatics administrators in US hospitals with ≥50 dedicated pediatric beds. We performed thematic analysis of challenges to developing and implementing adolescent portal policies., Results: We interviewed 65 informatics leaders representing 63 pediatric hospitals, 58 health care systems, 29 states, and 14 379 pediatric hospital beds. Most hospitals provided portal access to adolescents (86%) and parents (95%). Filtering of results sent to parental portals ranged widely, with 14% providing unfiltered access, 31% performing minimal filtering for sensitive information, and 43% offering limited access. Portal access policies also varied widely within states. Challenges to developing policies included legislation and compliance issues, tension between confidentiality and usefulness, clinicians' preferences and concerns, limited understanding and investment of institutions in pediatric issues, and limited focus of vendors on pediatric issues. Challenges to implementing policies included technical challenges, educating end-users, potential for parental coercion, harms of bad news, complex enrollment processes, and informatics workforce limitations., Conclusions: Adolescent portal access policies vary widely across and within states. Informatics administrators identified multiple challenges related to developing and implementing adolescent portal policies. Future efforts should strive to develop intrastate consensus on portal policies and to engage parents and adolescent patients to better understand preferences and needs., (Copyright © 2023 by the American Academy of Pediatrics.)

At the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic in the United States, stay-at-home orders disrupted normal research operations. Principal investigators (PIs) had to make decisions about conducting and staffing essential research under unprecedented, rapidly changing conditions. These decisions also had to be made amid other substantial work and life stressors, like pressures to be productive and staying healthy. Using survey methods, we asked PIs funded by the National Institutes of Health and the National Science Foundation (N = 930) to rate how they prioritized different considerations, such as personal risks, risks to research personnel, and career consequences, when making decisions. They also reported how difficult they found these choices and associated symptoms of stress. Using a checklist, PIs indicated those factors in their research environments that made their decisions easier (i.e., facilitators) or more difficult (i.e., barriers) to make. Finally, PIs also indicated how satisfied they were with their decisions and management of research during the disruption. Descriptive statistics summarize PIs' responses and inferential tests explore whether responses varied by academic rank or gender. PIs overall reported prioritizing the well-being and perspectives of research personnel, and they perceived more facilitators than barriers. Early-career faculty, however, rated concerns about their careers and productivity as higher priorities compared to their senior counterparts. Early-career faculty also perceived greater difficulty and stress, more barriers, fewer facilitators, and had less satisfaction with their decisions. Women rated several interpersonal concerns about their research personnel more highly than men and reported greater stress. The experience and perceptions of researchers during the COVID-19 pandemic can inform policies and practices when planning for future crises and recovering from the pandemic., (© 2023. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Nature B.V.)

Problem: Contemporary science emphasizes efficient translation of scientific discoveries into tangible, innovative products and services to improve human health. Therefore, researchers need skills in innovation and entrepreneurship (I&E) to select which problems to address and bring to market the most promising solutions. Training in this skillset is not currently available to most biomedical research trainees., Approach: The Entrepreneurship for Biomedicine (E4B) training program was created to develop biomedical researchers' I&E skills. The program comprises 2 semester-length courses: E4B1 teaches core skills; E4B2 focuses on advanced skills for those interested in pursuing funding for a new venture. In addition to traditional entrepreneurship training, E4B teaches ethics and personal skills such as resilience, communication, and team-building. Each course is delivered online and requires about 4 hours weekly. Program elements include short videos for didactic content; a team-based capstone project; mentorship from experienced entrepreneurs; and a live, virtual pitch presentation. The program is housed at Washington University School of Medicine in St. Louis and is open to pre- and postdoctoral biomedical research trainees and faculty nationwide., Outcomes: In 2020, 77 trainees completed E4B1 and 13 went on to complete E4B2. Trainees in both courses were satisfied with learning content and mentorship and would recommend the program to a friend. Pre- and postanalyses demonstrated that trainees' confidence in their knowledge about and ability to perform I&E tasks taught throughout the program increased. Since completion, 4 graduates have received external funding for an innovation and 3 have started a company., Next Steps: E4B is well accepted, and this preliminary evaluation suggests the program is effective. It could serve to support medical school curricula, business competitions, and technology transfer efforts, which are opportunities for future exploration. A more robust evaluation is planned and recruitment will be expanded to increase participation from women and underrepresented populations., (Copyright © 2022 by the Association of American Medical Colleges.)

Introduction: Public-facing maps of COVID-19 cases, hospital admissions, and deaths are commonly displayed at the state, county, and zip code levels, and low case counts are suppressed to protect confidentiality. Public health authorities are tasked with case identification, contact tracing, and canvasing for educational purposes during a pandemic. Given limited resources, authorities would benefit from the ability to tailor their efforts to a particular neighborhood or congregate living facility., Methods: We describe the methods of building a real-time visualization of patients with COVID-19-positive tests, which facilitates timely public health response to the pandemic. We developed an interactive street-level visualization that shows new cases developing over time and resolving after 14 days of infection. Our source data included patient demographics (ie, age, race and ethnicity, and sex), street address of residence, respiratory test results, and date of test., Results: We used colored dots to represent infections. The resulting animation shows where new cases developed in the region and how patterns changed over the course of the pandemic. Users can enlarge specific areas of the map and see street-level detail on residential location of each case and can select from demographic overlays and contour mapping options to see high-level patterns and associations with demographics and chronic disease prevalence as they emerge., Conclusions: Before the development of this tool, local public health departments in our region did not have a means to map cases of disease to the street level and gain real-time insights into the underlying population where hotspots had developed. For privacy reasons, this tool is password-protected and not available to the public. We expect this tool to prove useful to public health departments as they navigate not only COVID-19 pandemic outcomes but also other public health threats, including chronic diseases and communicable disease outbreaks.

The environment researchers work in influences their ethical decisions and behavior. A "climate" for research ethics in a research lab exists when members of the lab perceive that the group values and is committed to principles of research ethics. In this study, we aimed to develop a short, reliable and valid measure assessing perceptions of climate for research ethics at the lab level. The resulting measure, Lab Climate for Research Ethics, was developed using standard scale development guidelines. In a large sample of postdoctoral researchers ( N = 570), we found preliminary evidence that the new measure has adequate internal consistency reliability. It was also correlated with an existing measure of climate for research ethics and was not correlated with social desirability, demonstrating evidence of construct validity. The new measure can be used in a variety of contexts, including research administrators seeking information about climate within labs across an institution and researchers who study lab environments.

Multiple factors can facilitate or impede the fulfillment of communication functions in pediatric cancer. In this systematic review, we evaluated 109 studies from the preceding 20 years that presented qualitative or quantitative evidence of barriers or facilitators to communication in pediatric cancer. Using a multilevel framework developed in our prior study, we then analyzed and categorized the levels of barriers and facilitators identified in included studies. The vast majority of studies focused on individual-level barriers, rather than team, organization/system, collaborating hospital, community, or policy-level barriers. Future studies should explore the full range of factors that affect communication., (© 2021 Wiley Periodicals LLC.)

Background: Healthcare is expected to increasingly integrate technologies enabled by artificial intelligence (AI) into patient care. Understanding perceptions of these tools is essential to successful development and adoption. This exploratory study gauged participants' level of openness, concern, and perceived benefit associated with AI-driven healthcare technologies. We also explored socio-demographic, health-related, and psychosocial correlates of these perceptions., Methods: We developed a measure depicting six AI-driven technologies that either diagnose, predict, or suggest treatment. We administered the measure via an online survey to adults (N = 936) in the United States using MTurk, a crowdsourcing platform. Participants indicated their level of openness to using the AI technology in the healthcare scenario. Items reflecting potential concerns and benefits associated with each technology accompanied the scenarios. Participants rated the extent that the statements of concerns and benefits influenced their perception of favorability toward the technology. Participants completed measures of socio-demographics, health variables, and psychosocial variables such as trust in the healthcare system and trust in technology. Exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses of the concern and benefit items identified two factors representing overall level of concern and perceived benefit. Descriptive analyses examined levels of openness, concern, and perceived benefit. Correlational analyses explored associations of socio-demographic, health, and psychosocial variables with openness, concern, and benefit scores while multivariable regression models examined these relationships concurrently., Results: Participants were moderately open to AI-driven healthcare technologies (M = 3.1/5.0 ± 0.9), but there was variation depending on the type of application, and the statements of concerns and benefits swayed views. Trust in the healthcare system and trust in technology were the strongest, most consistent correlates of openness, concern, and perceived benefit. Most other socio-demographic, health-related, and psychosocial variables were less strongly, or not, associated, but multivariable models indicated some personality characteristics (e.g., conscientiousness and agreeableness) and socio-demographics (e.g., full-time employment, age, sex, and race) were modestly related to perceptions., Conclusions: Participants' openness appears tenuous, suggesting early promotion strategies and experiences with novel AI technologies may strongly influence views, especially if implementation of AI technologies increases or undermines trust. The exploratory nature of these findings warrants additional research., (© 2021. The Author(s).)

This article demonstrates how instructors of professionalism and ethics training programs can integrate a professional decision-making tool in training curricula. This tool can help trainees understand how to apply professional decision-making strategies to address the threats posed by a variety of psychological and environmental factors when they are faced with complex professional and ethical situations. We begin by highlighting key decision-making frameworks and discussing factors that may undermine the use of professional decision-making strategies. Then, drawing upon findings from past research, we present the "SMART" professional decision-making framework: seeking help, managing emotions, anticipating consequences, recognizing rules and context, and testing assumptions and motives. Next, we present a vignette that poses a complex ethical and professional challenge and illustrate how each professional decision-making strategy could or should be used by characters in the case. To conclude, we review a series of educational practices and pedagogical tools intended to help trainers facilitate trainee learning, retention, and application of "SMART" decision-making strategies., Competing Interests: Conflict of Interest The authors declare that they have no conflicts of interest.

Surgical registries have provided reliable, generalizable, and applicable clinical data that have shaped many fields. Broad collection of defined data can answer clinical questions with greater numbers of patients and more ability to generalize to routine clinical care than randomized trials. National hand surgical registries exist outside the United States. Before the pursuit of a registry, the focus of such an effort must be defined to ensure that registry goals are feasible. This article presents the consensus process conducted by the American Society for Surgery of the Hand's Registry Task Force exploring potential diagnoses for a hand registry., (Copyright © 2021 American Society for Surgery of the Hand. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Researchers must conduct research responsibly for it to have an impact and to safeguard trust in science. Essential responsibilities of researchers include using rigorous, reproducible research methods, reporting findings in a trustworthy manner, and giving the researchers who contributed appropriate authorship credit. This "how-to" guide covers strategies and practices for doing reproducible research and being a responsible author. The article also covers how to utilize decision-making strategies when uncertain about the best way to proceed in a challenging situation. The advice focuses especially on graduate students, but is appropriate for undergraduates and experienced researchers. It begins with an overview of responsible conduct of research, research misconduct, and ethical behavior in the scientific workplace. The takeaway message is that responsible conduct of research requires a thoughtful approach to doing research in order to ensure trustworthy results and conclusions, and that researchers receive fair credit. © 2021 Wiley Periodicals LLC., (© 2021 Wiley Periodicals LLC.)

Relationships with mentors and labmates are defining aspects of a researcher's journey in science. Ideally, these interactions are outstanding opportunities to learn from others and provide the basis for lifelong collaborations. Unfortunately, sometimes interpersonal dynamics in the lab are challenging. Graduate students entering the lab can greatly benefit from advice about navigating the interpersonal aspects of doing science. This article covers essential recommendations for developing a good trainee-mentor relationship and working well with peers in the lab, or being a "good lab citizen." Lab members-especially graduate students-often spend more time with labmates than with their friends and family during their graduate career, making these relationships essential to their well-being. The guidance also covers some advice for handling a tense relationship or problematic work environment. Finally, the advice concludes by discussing how to manage the fear of failure, overcome imposter syndrome, develop self-awareness, and cope with stress. These four issues are fundamental to success in research but are not discussed with graduate students as much as may be necessary. © 2021 Wiley Periodicals LLC., (© 2021 Wiley Periodicals LLC.)

Precision medicine relies upon artificial intelligence (AI)-driven technologies that raise ethical and practical concerns. In this study, we developed and validated a measure of parental openness and concerns with AI-driven technologies in their child's healthcare. In this cross-sectional survey, we enrolled parents of children <18 years in 2 rounds for exploratory ( n = 418) and confirmatory ( n = 386) factor analysis. We developed a 12-item measure of parental openness to AI-driven technologies, and a 33-item measure identifying concerns that parents found important when considering these technologies. We also evaluated associations between openness and attitudes, beliefs, personality traits, and demographics. Parents ( N = 804) reported mean openness to AI-driven technologies of M = 3.4/5, SD = 0.9. We identified seven concerns that parents considered important when evaluating these technologies: quality/accuracy, privacy, shared decision making, convenience, cost, human element of care, and social justice. In multivariable linear regression, parental openness was positively associated with quality (beta = 0.23), convenience (beta = 0.16), and cost (beta = 0.11), as well as faith in technology (beta = 0.23) and trust in health information systems (beta = 0.12). Parental openness was negatively associated with the perceived importance of shared decision making (beta = -0.16) and being female (beta = -0.12). Developers might support parental openness by addressing these concerns during the development and implementation of novel AI-driven technologies.

Scientific work is demanding and complex, requiring those leading research to be simultaneously innovative and ethical in their work. Along with this, those leading scientific teams need to be able to influence both the work being done and lab members doing the work. Thus, both leadership and management skills are necessary to navigating the organizational, social, and ethical components of the research process in order to do rigorous, ethical, and high-quality scientific work. This paper recommends a number of practices that leaders of research teams should engage in, including management behaviors for "leading the work" and leadership behaviors for "leading the people" that foster excellence and integrity in research labs. Researchers can take an intentional approach to leadership and management to create a robust environment for ethical research. Overall, a researcher's routine behaviors as leaders of their labs should establish a healthy work environment and promote effective interpersonal interactions among lab members. Further, the lab requires routine procedures and structure to provide adequate oversight of the research. This paper also addresses challenges that may arise when implementing leadership and management practices, along with strategies for overcoming these strategies. Avenues for future research and policy development related to leadership and management in scientific contexts are discussed.

We argue that once a normative claim is developed, there is an imperative to effect changes based on this norm. As such, ethicists should adopt an "implementation mindset" when formulating norms, and collaborate with others who have the expertise needed to implement policies and practices. To guide this translation of norms into practice, we propose a framework that incorporates implementation science into ethics. Implementation science is a discipline dedicated to supporting the sustained enactment of interventions. We further argue that implementation principles should be integrated into the development of specific normative claims as well as the enactment of these norms. Ethicists formulating a specific norm should consider whether that norm can feasibly be enacted because the resultant specific norm will directly affect the types of interventions subsequently developed. To inform this argument, we will describe the fundamental principles of implementation science, using informed consent to research participation as an illustration.

Background: Good Clinical Practice is an international standard for the design and conduct of clinical trials to ensure ethical and scientific integrity. Recent National Institutes of Health policy mandates Good Clinical Practice training for all investigators and staff involved in National Institutes of Health-funded clinical trials, yet approaches to Good Clinical Practice training vary widely. There are limited data on Good Clinical Practice knowledge among the clinical trial workforce and no evidence regarding effective methods to learn Good Clinical Practice., Methods: We used an exploratory sequential mixed-methods design. We conducted 18 exploratory qualitative interviews with clinical research coordinators to help inform the development of the quantitative survey. We then administered a validated 32-item, multiple-choice test of Good Clinical Practice knowledge with a survey of work and training experiences to 625 clinical research coordinators at three academic medical centers in the United States. Variables that were significantly associated with Good Clinical Practice knowledge were entered into a multiple regression analysis to identify unique predictors of Good Clinical Practice knowledge. We controlled for verbal-numerical reasoning and learning orientation., Results: During qualitative interviews, clinical research coordinators reported that formal Good Clinical Practice training had value but they simultaneously emphasized the importance of experience, day-to-day practice, and observing colleagues and mentors as essential to supplement formal training. In our quantitative survey, five variables predicted a total of 22% of variance in Good Clinical Practice knowledge scores: years of experience as a clinical research coordinator, working on diverse types of trials, supporting industry-funded trials, being certified in clinical research coordination, and aggregated hours of online and face-to-face training (in that order)., Conclusion: The duration and richness of experience as a clinical research coordinator were the strongest predictors of Good Clinical Practice knowledge, a finding consistent with our exploratory qualitative interview results. Our findings suggest that formal online and face-to-face training has a minimal influence on Good Clinical Practice knowledge. The type of training-whether online or face to face-does not make a significant difference in Good Clinical Practice knowledge scores. Much of the variance in Good Clinical Practice knowledge remains unexplained, calling for further research in this area.

This paper describes the development and validation of a new 32-item test of knowledge of good clinical practice (GCP) administered to 625 clinical research coordinators. GCP training is mandated by study sponsors including the US National Institutes of Health. The effectiveness of training is rarely assessed, and the lack of validated tests is an obstacle to assessment. The GCP knowledge test was developed following evaluation of two existing widely used GCP tests to ensure it accurately reflects the content of current training. The final GCP knowledge test demonstrated good reliability ( α = 0.69). It is a valid and reliable instrument for measuring knowledge of GCP. The test will be useful in assessing the effectiveness of GCP training programs as well as individuals' mastery of GCP content., (© The Association for Clinical and Translational Science 2020.)

Introduction: This study developed a new Professional Decision-Making in Medicine Measure that assesses the use of effective decision-making strategies: seek help, manage emotions, recognize consequences and rules, and test assumptions and motives. The aim was to develop a content valid measure and obtain initial evidence for construct validity so that the measure could be used in future research or educational assessment., Methods: Clinical scenario-based items were developed based on a review of the literature and interviews with physicians. For each item, respondents are tasked with selecting two responses (out of six plausible options) that they would choose in that situation. Three of the six options reflect a decision-making strategy; these responses are scored as correct. Data were collected from a sample of 318 fourth-year medical students in the United States. They completed a 16-item version of the measure (Form A) and measures of social desirability, moral disengagement, and professionalism attitudes. Professionalism ratings from clerkships were also obtained. A sub-group (n = 63) completed a second 16-item measure (Form B) to pilot test the instrument, as two test forms are useful for pre-posttest designs., Results: Scores on the new measure indicated that, on average, participants answered 75% of items correctly. Evidence for construct validity included the lack of correlation between scores on the measure and socially desirable responding, negative correlation with moral disengagement, and modest to low correlations with professionalism attitudes. A positive correlation was observed with a clerkship rating focused on professionalism in peer interactions., Conclusions: These findings demonstrate modest proficiency in the use of decision-making strategies among fourth-year medical students. Additional research using the Professional Decision-Making Measure should explore scores among physicians in various career stages, and the causes and correlates of scores. Educators could utilize the measure to assess courses that teach decision-making strategies., Competing Interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

Researchers encounter challenges that require making complex professional decisions. Strategies such as seeking help and anticipating consequences support decision-making in these situations. Existing evidence on a measure of professional decision-making in research (the PDR) that assesses the use of decision-making strategies revealed that NIH-funded researchers born outside of the U.S. tended to score below their U.S. counterparts. To examine potential explanations for this association, this study recruited 101 researchers born in the United States and 102 born internationally to complete the PDR and measures of basic personal values, values in scientific work, discrimination between the seriousness of rules in research, exposure to unprofessional research practices, and acculturation to American culture. Several variables were associated with PDR scores-discrimination between types of rules in research, exposure to unprofessional research practices, acculturation, and the basic personal values of power, security, and benevolence. However, only security, benevolence, acculturation, and rule discrimination were also associated with nation of origin. In multivariate models, the variance explained by these variables in accounting for the association of nation of origin and PDR scores was somewhat overlapping, thus, only security and benevolence remained as unique, statistically significant predictors. Thus, this study identified some important variables in the association of nation of origin and PDR, but more research is needed. In a secondary analysis to examine the "clinical significance" (the practical importance) of scores on the PDR, this study examined aggregated PDR score data from the present sample and past samples of investigators. This analysis identified scores that may suggest a concern versus those scores that may be interpreted as excellent, proficient, or marginal. Implications for training and mentoring, along with considerations for future research are discussed.

Introduction: Conducting rigorous scientific inquiry within the bounds of research regulation and acceptable practice requires a principal investigator to lead and manage research processes and personnel. This study explores the practices used by investigators nominated as exemplars of research excellence and integrity to produce rigorous, reproducible research and comply with research regulations., Methods: Using a qualitative research design, we interviewed 52 principal investigators working in the United States at top research universities and the National Institutes of Health Intramural Research Program. We solicited nominations of researchers meeting two criteria: (1) they are federally-funded researchers doing high-quality, high-impact research, and (2) have reputations for professionalism and integrity. Each investigator received an initial nomination addressing both criteria and at least one additional endorsement corroborating criteria 2. A panel of researchers and our research team reviewed the nominations to select finalists who were invited to participate. The cohort of "Research Exemplars" includes highly accomplished researchers in diverse scientific disciplines. The semi-structured interview questions asked them to describe the routine practices they employ to foster rigor and regulatory compliance. We used inductive thematic analysis to identify common practices., Results: The exemplars identified a core set of 8 practices and provided strategies for employing them. The practices included holding regular team meetings, encouraging shared ownership, providing supervision, ensuring adequate training, fostering positive attitudes about compliance, scrutinizing data and findings, and following standard operating procedures. Above all, the use of these practices aim to create a psychologically safe work environment in which lab members openly collaborate to scrutinize their work and share in accountability for rigorous, compliant research., Conclusions: Researchers typically receive limited systematic training in how to lead and manage their research teams. Training and education for principal investigators should include essential leadership and management practices and strategies that support doing high-quality research with integrity., Competing Interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

We conducted semi-structured, telephone interviews with 52 federally funded researchers nominated as exemplars for their integrity and professional conduct, and their scientific achievements. The aim was to identify the practices they report utilizing to build respectful relationships in their teams. We found four practices, holding meetings, providing supervision and guidance, encouraging shared ownership, and expressing values, which were also important to performing high-quality, compliant research, were essential to fostering relationships. The most common practice described for building relationships was actively and deliberately cultivating a positive team environment. Additionally, exemplars described the need to lead by example, tailor their approach to the needs of individuals, address interpersonal conflict, and hire team members cautiously. We also identified practices the exemplars reported as important to managing the demands of their work and found that encouraging shared ownership and tailoring to individuals supported this goal. Additional strategies related to prioritization and planning, seeking advice, engaging in self-care, and managing emotional reactions. Finally, we identified priorities guiding the exemplars' practices. Key priorities included providing outstanding mentoring, building collaborations and relationships, and engaging in discovery and innovation. Investigators require exceptional leadership skills but receive limited systematic leadership training. Addressing this gap would advance research excellence and integrity.

Background: Overlapping surgery is attracting increased scrutiny. The American College of Surgeons states that the attending surgeon must be present for all critical portions of a surgical procedure; however, critical portions of surgical procedures are not defined. We hypothesized that a Delphi panel process would measure consensus on critical portions of 3 common hand surgical procedures., Methods: We used a Delphi process to achieve consensus on the critical portions of carpal tunnel release, ulnar nerve transposition, and open reduction and internal fixation of the distal part of the radius. The panelists were 10 hand surgeons (7 fellowship-trained surgeons and 3 fellows). Following an in-person discussion to finalize steps for each procedure, 2 online rounds were completed to rate steps from 1 (not critical) to 9 (extremely critical). We operationalized consensus as ≥80% of ratings within the same range: 1 to 3 (not critical), 4 to 6 (somewhat critical), and 7 to 9 (critical). Because of a lack of consensus on some steps after round 2, another in-person discussion and a third online round were conducted to rate only steps involving disagreement or somewhat critical ratings using a dichotomous scale (critical or not critical)., Results: Following the first 2 rounds, there was consensus on 19 of 24 steps (including 3 steps being somewhat critical) and no consensus on 5 of 24 steps. At the end of round 3, there was consensus on all but 2 steps (identification of the medial antebrachial cutaneous nerve in ulnar nerve transposition and clinical assessment of joint stability in open reduction and internal fixation of the distal part of the radius), with moderate disagreement (3 compared with 7) for both., Conclusions: The panel reached consensus on the designation of critical or noncritical for all steps of a carpal tunnel release, all but 1 step of an ulnar nerve transposition, and all but 1 step of open reduction and internal fixation of the distal part of the radius. The lack of consensus on whether 2 of the steps are critical leaves this determination at the discretion of the attending surgeon. The findings of our Delphi panel provide guidance to our division on which portions of the surgical procedure are critical and thus require the attending surgeon's presence.

According to "Research Exemplars," research requires attending to matters of heart as much as mind. The human dimension in research-relationships, passion, resilience, and leadership-was the common thread in their advice for a successful career. We discuss strategies to cultivate intra- and inter-personal skills fostering these aspects of research., (Copyright © 2018 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

The authors explore five dimensions of research ethics: (1) normative ethics, which includes meta-ethical questions; (2) compliance with regulations, statutes, and institutional policies; (3) the rigor and reproducibility of science; (4) social value; and (5) workplace relationships. Each of the five dimensions is important not only because it addresses an aspect of good research done in a good manner but also because it addresses the concerns of key stakeholders in the research enterprise. The five-dimension framework can guide institutions as they answer three questions central to any research ethics program: (1) Who should champion research ethics? (2) What should interventions look like? and (3) Who should participate in the interventions? The framework is valuable because the answers to these three questions are radically different depending on the dimension under consideration. An expanded vision of research ethics does not entail that institutions should require additional online training or approvals from institutional review boards. However, without acknowledging all five dimensions, programs risk missing an important aspect of research ethics or ignoring the interests of important stakeholders.

Successfully navigating the norms of a society is a complex task that involves recognizing diverse kinds of rules as well as the relative weight attached to them. In the United States (U.S.), different kinds of rules-federal statutes and regulations, scientific norms, and professional ideals-guide the work of researchers. Penalties for violating these different kinds of rules and norms can range from the displeasure of peers to criminal sanctions. We proposed that it would be more difficult for researchers working in the U.S. who were born in other nations to distinguish the seriousness of violating rules across diverse domains. We administered a new measure, the evaluating rules in science task (ERST), to National Institutes of Health-funded investigators (101 born in the U.S. and 102 born outside of the U.S.). The ERST assessed perceptions of the seriousness of violating research regulations, norms, and ideals, and allowed us to calculate the degree to which researchers distinguished between the seriousness of each rule category. The ERST also assessed researchers' predictions of the seriousness that research integrity officers (RIOs) would assign to the rules. We compared researchers' predictions to the seriousness ratings of 112 RIOs working at U.S. research-intensive universities. U.S.-born researchers were significantly better at distinguishing between the seriousness of violating federal research regulations and violating ideals of science, and they were more accurate in their predictions of the views of RIOs. Acculturation to the U.S. moderated the effects of nationality on accuracy. We discuss the implications of these findings in terms of future research and education.

In this paper we describe the development and initial psychometric evaluation of a new measure, the values in scientific work (VSW). This scale assesses the level of importance that investigators attach to different VSW. It taps a broad range of intrinsic, extrinsic, and social values that motivate the work of scientists, including values specific to scientific work (e.g., truth and integrity) and more classic work values (e.g., security and prestige) in the context of science. Notably, the values represented in this scale are relevant to scientists regardless of their career stage and research focus. We administered the VSW and a measure of global values to 203 NIH-funded investigators. Exploratory factor analyses suggest the delineation of eight VSW, including autonomy, research ethics, social impact, income, collaboration, innovation and growth, conserving relationships, and job security. These VSW showed predictable and distinct associations with global values. Implications of these findings for work on research integrity and scientific misconduct are discussed.

Qualitative data provide rich information on research questions in diverse fields. Recent calls for increased transparency and openness in research emphasize data sharing. However, qualitative data sharing has yet to become the norm internationally and is particularly uncommon in the United States. Guidance for archiving and secondary use of qualitative data is required for progress in this regard. In this study, we review the benefits and concerns associated with qualitative data sharing and then describe the results of a content analysis of guidelines from international repositories that archive qualitative data. A minority of repositories provide qualitative data sharing guidelines. Of the guidelines available, there is substantial variation in whether specific topics are addressed. Some topics, such as removing direct identifiers, are consistently addressed, while others, such as providing an anonymization log, are not. We discuss the implications of our study for education, best practices, and future research.

Principal investigators are responsible for a myriad of leadership and management activities in their work. The practices they use to navigate these responsibilities ultimately influence the quality and integrity of research. However, leadership and management roles in research have received scant empirical examination. Semi-structured interviews with 32 National Institutes of Health (NIH)-funded genetic researchers revealed that they considered leadership and management essential for effective research, but their scientific training inadequately prepared them. We also report management practices that the researchers described using in their labs, as well as their perceptions of a proposed intervention to enhance laboratory leadership. These findings suggest best practices for the research community, future directions for scientific training, and implications for research on leadership and management in science., Competing Interests: Disclaimers The authors have no conflicts of interests or disclaimers to report.

In this paper, we report on the development and validity of the Professional Decision-Making in Research (PDR) measure, a vignette-based test that examines decision-making strategies used by investigators when confronted with challenging situations in the context of empirical research. The PDR was administered online with a battery of validity measures to a group of NIH-funded researchers and research trainees who were diverse in terms of age, years of experience, types of research, and race. The PDR demonstrated adequate reliability (alpha = .84) and parallel form correlation (r = .70). As hypothesized, the PDR was significantly negatively correlated with narcissism, cynicism, moral disengagement, and compliance disengagement; it was not correlated with socially desirable responding. In regression analysis, the strongest predictors of higher PDR scores were low compliance disengagement, speaking English as a native language, conducting clinical research with human subjects, and low levels of narcissism. Given that the PDR was written at an eighth grade reading level to be suitable for use with English as a second language participants and that only one-fourth of items focused on clinical research, further research into the possible roles of culture and research ethics training across specialties is warranted. This initial validity study demonstrates the potential usefulness of the PDR as an educational outcome assessment measure and a research instrument for studies on professionalism and integrity in research.

The professional decision-making in research (PDR) measure was administered to 400 National Institutes of Health (NIH)-funded and industry-funded investigators, along with measures of cynicism, moral disengagement, compliance disengagement, impulsivity, work stressors, knowledge of responsible conduct of research (RCR), and socially desirable response tendencies. Negative associations were found for the PDR and measures of cynicism, moral disengagement, and compliance disengagement, while positive associations were found for the PDR and RCR knowledge and positive urgency, an impulsivity subscale. PDR scores were not related to socially desirable responding, or to measures of work stressors and the remaining impulsivity subscales. In a multivariate logistic regression analysis, lower moral disengagement scores, higher RCR knowledge, and identifying the United States as one's nation of origin emerged as key predictors of stronger performance on the PDR. The implications of these findings for understanding the measurement of decision-making in research and future directions for research and RCR education are discussed.

Aaron Antonovsky, the medical sociologist, defined the sense of coherence as a pervasive sense that the events in one's life are comprehensible, manageable, and meaningful or worthwhile. Research on the sense of coherence indicates that it is positively correlated with resilience and adaptive coping with disabilities and illnesses. The collection of first-person narratives published in Narrative Inquiry in Bioethics on genetic testing can be understood as expressions of the human effort to restore or sustain a sense of coherence in the face of illness, uncertainty, or even curiosity about one's origins and future wellbeing. While the medical usefulness of the genetic testing that was discussed in the collection of narratives was often modest, the contribution of testing to the sense of coherence was often greater. Understanding the sense of coherence as a possible motive for genetic testing might reshape the way that we conceive of the benefits and the burdens of genetic testing and the disclosure of incidental findings.

Efforts to advance research integrity in light of concerns about misbehavior in research rely heavily on education in the responsible conduct of research (RCR). However, there is limited evidence for the effectiveness of RCR instruction as a remedy. Assessment is essential in RCR education if the research community wishes to expend the effort of instructors, students, and trainees wisely. This article presents key considerations that instructors and course directors must consider in aligning learning objectives with instructional methods and assessment measures, and it provides illustrative examples. Above all, in order for RCR educators to assess outcomes more effectively, they must align assessment to their learning objectives and attend to the validity of the measures used.

This article describes a systematic approach for developing instructional programs that emphasizes defining learning needs, planning the learning environment, and evaluating learning to ensure continuous course improvement. This review outlines the nature of these interrelated components of instructional development and draws attention to issues specific to instruction in research ethics. Guiding questions summarize key, practical considerations, and the discussion suggests future steps in the pursuit of effective instruction in research ethics. Overall, the variety of approaches to instruction and mixed findings regarding its effectiveness underscore the need to apply a systematic framework to instruction in research ethics.

Intra-organizational competition was examined in relation to ethicality. The effect of a competitor being an in-group versus and out-group member, competitor offering uncorroborated or corroborated information, and the impact of the competitor expressing selfish, pro-group, or pro-organizational level goals were examined. Findings suggest that the way competition is presented has an important influence on how well individuals are able to make sense of an ethically ambiguous situation and render an ethical decision. A main effect for information sharing was found, such that when a competitor offers uncorroborated information participants made less ethical decisions and used pro-ethical reasoning strategies less often. An additional main effect was found suggesting that participants made more ethical decisions when working with an in-group competitor rather than an out-group competitor. Complex interactive effects were also found and discussed suggesting that pro-ethical reasoning strategies may be used less often depending on information corroboration, the competitor's relative group membership status, and the motives expressed by the competitor.

This study examined the role of reflection on personal cases for making ethical decisions with regard to new ethical problems. Participants assumed the position of a business manager in a hypothetical organization and solved ethical problems that might be encountered. Prior to making a decision for the business problems, participants reflected on a relevant ethical experience. The findings revealed that application of material garnered from reflection on a personal experience was associated with decisions of higher ethicality. However, whether the case was viewed as positive or negative, and whether the outcomes, process, or outcomes and processes embedded in the experience were examined, influenced the application of case material to the new problem. As expected, examining positive experiences and the processes involved in those positive experiences resulted in greater application of case material to new problems. Future directions and implications for understanding ethical decision-making are discussed.

The current study uses a sensemaking model and thinking strategies identified in earlier research to examine ethical decision-making. Using a sample of 163 undergraduates, a low fidelity simulation approach is used to study the effects personal involvement (in causing the problem and personal involvement in experiencing the outcomes of the problem) could have on the use of cognitive reasoning strategies that have been shown to promote ethical decision-making. A mediated model is presented which suggests that environmental factors influence reasoning strategies, reasoning strategies influence sensemaking, and sensemaking in turn influences ethical decision-making. Findings were mixed but generally supported the hypothesized model. Interestingly, framing the outcomes of ethically charged situations in terms of more global organizational outcomes rather than personal outcomes was found to promote the use of pro-ethical cognitive reasoning strategies.

Forecasting involves predicting outcomes based on observations of the situation at hand. We examined the impact of the number and types of consequences considered on the quality of ethical decision-making. Undergraduates role-played several ethical problems in which they forecast potential outcomes and made decisions. Performance pressure (difficult demands placed on the situation) and interpersonal conflict (clashes among people in the problem situation) were manipulated within each problem scenario. The results indicated that the identification of potential consequences was positively associated with both higher quality forecasts and more ethical decisions. Neither performance pressure nor interpersonal conflict affected the quality of forecasts or decisions. Theoretical and practical implications of these findings and the use of this research approach are discussed.

This study examined the role of temporal orientation and affective frame in the execution of ethical decision-making strategies. In reflecting on a past experience or imagining a future experience, participants thought about experiences that they considered either positive or negative. The participants recorded their thinking about that experience by responding to several questions, and their responses were content-analyzed for the use of ethical decision-making strategies. The findings indicated that a future temporal orientation was associated with greater strategy use. Likewise, a positive affective frame was associated with greater strategy use. Future orientation may permit better strategy execution than a past orientation because it facilitates more objective, balanced contemplation of the reflected-upon situation, and minimizes potential self-threat associated with past behavior. A positive affective frame likely improves strategy execution because it facilitates active analysis of the experience. Future directions and implications of these findings are discussed.

This study examined the role of key causal analysis strategies in forecasting and ethical decision-making. Undergraduate participants took on the role of the key actor in several ethical problems and were asked to identify and analyze the causes, forecast potential outcomes, and make a decision about each problem. Time pressure and analytic mindset were manipulated while participants worked through these problems. The results indicated that forecast quality was associated with decision ethicality, and the identification of the critical causes of the problem was associated with both higher quality forecasts and higher ethicality of decisions. Neither time pressure nor analytic mindset impacted forecasts or ethicality of decisions. Theoretical and practical implications of these findings are discussed.

Purpose: To examine the effects that existing courses on the responsible conduct of research (RCR) have on ethical decision making by assessing the ethicality of decisions made in response to ethical problems and the underlying processes involved in ethical decision making. These processes included how an individual thinks through ethical problems (i.e., meta-cognitive reasoning strategies) and the emphasis placed on social dimensions of ethical problems (i.e., social-behavioral responses)., Method: In 2005-2007, recruitment announcements were made, stating that a nationwide, online study was being conducted to examine the impact of RCR instruction on the ethical decision making of scientists. Recruitment yielded contacts with over 200 RCR faculty at 21 research universities and medical schools; 40 (20%) RCR instructors enrolled their courses in the current study. From those courses, 173 participants completed an ethical decision-making measure., Results: A mixed pattern of effects emerged. The ethicality of decisions did not improve as a result of RCR instruction and even decreased for decisions pertaining to business aspects of research, such as contract bidding. Course participants improved on some meta-cognitive reasoning strategies, such as awareness of the situation and consideration of personal motivations, but declined for seeking help and considering others' perspectives. Participants also increased their endorsement of detrimental social-behavioral responses, such as deception, retaliation, and avoidance of personal responsibility., Conclusions: These findings indicated that RCR instruction may not be as effective as intended and, in fact, may even be harmful. Harmful effects might result if instruction leads students to overstress avoidance of ethical problems, be overconfident in their ability to handle ethical problems, or overemphasize their ethical nature. Future research must examine these and other possible obstacles to effective RCR instruction.

Students of creativity have long been interested in the relationship between creativity and deviant behaviors such as criminality, mental disease, and unethical behavior. In the present study we wished to examine the relationship between creative thinking skills and ethical decision-making among scientists. Accordingly, 258 doctoral students in the health, biological, and social sciences were asked to complete a measure of creative processing skills (e.g., problem definition, conceptual combination, idea generation) and a measure of ethical decision-making examining four domains, data management, study conduct, professional practices, and business practices. It was found that ethical decision-making in all four of these areas was related to creative problem-solving processes with late cycle processes (e.g., idea generation and solution monitoring) proving particularly important. The implications of these findings for understanding the relationship between creative and deviant thought are discussed.