El-Dessouky Hadir F, Abdel-Aziz Amr M, Ibrahim Chadi, Moni Malini, Abul Fadl Reham, Silverman Henry
Faculty of Dentistry, King Abdulaziz University, Jeddah 21589, Saudi Arabia.
Int J Dent. 2011;2011:694759. doi: 10.1155/2011/694759. Epub 2011 Jul 3.
Objective. To assess the knowledge, awareness, and attitudes of dental faculty regarding research ethics and research ethics committees (RECs). Design. Through convenience sampling, we distributed a survey to academics at dental faculties at two universities in the Middle East. We used descriptive, chi-square, and logistic regression statistics to analyze the data. Results. Our response rate was 62.5%. A large majority (>90%) held positive attitudes towards RECs; however, almost half (44.0%) thought that RECs would delay research. Less than half (36.8%) had received prior training in research ethics, and the average score they achieved on the questions on research ethics was only 40.2%. Most (>90%), however, were favorable towards research ethics education. Finally, some faculty held attitudes regarding certain research ethics practices that were not optimal. Conclusions. We conclude that among the dental faculties participating in our study, there is broad-based acceptance of RECs and training in research ethics, while there are knowledge gaps in research ethics. We recommend further studies to determine the generalizability of our findings to other institutions.
目的。评估牙科教师对研究伦理和研究伦理委员会（RECs）的知识、认知及态度。设计。通过便利抽样，我们向中东地区两所大学牙科学院的学者发放了一份调查问卷。我们使用描述性统计、卡方检验和逻辑回归统计来分析数据。结果。我们的回复率为62.5%。绝大多数（>90%）对研究伦理委员会持积极态度；然而，几乎一半（44.0%）的人认为研究伦理委员会会延迟研究。不到一半（36.8%）的人曾接受过研究伦理方面的培训，他们在研究伦理问题上的平均得分仅为40.2%。然而，大多数（>90%）人支持研究伦理教育。最后，一些教师对某些研究伦理实践持有并非最佳的态度。结论。我们得出结论，在参与我们研究的牙科学院中，对研究伦理委员会和研究伦理培训有广泛的接受度，但在研究伦理方面存在知识差距。我们建议进一步开展研究，以确定我们的研究结果对其他机构的可推广性。
