Kennedy Michelle, Booth Kade, Bryant Jamie, Collis Felicity, Chamberlain Catherine, Hughes Jaquelyne, Hobden Breanne, Griffiths Kalinda E, Wenitong Mark, O'Mara Peter, Brown Alex, Eades Sandra J, Kong Kelvin M, Lovett Raymond W
University of Newcastle, Newcastle, NSW.
Hunter Medical Research Institute, Newcastle, NSW.
Med J Aust. 2025 Feb 3;222 Suppl 2:S49-S56. doi: 10.5694/mja2.52572.
Describe perceptions of how well researchers conducting Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander health and medical research apply ethical research practices.
Cross-sectional online survey.
SETTING, PARTICIPANTS: Researchers who included Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people or their data in their projects, and current or past members (previous 5 years) of a human research ethics committee that assessed Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander research.
Researchers' engagement with 15 ethical research practices (on a 5-point Likert scale, poor to excellent).
561 participants (382 researchers [68.1%] and 179 human research ethics committee members [31.9%]) completed the survey. Across all research practices, a rating of excellent was least frequently endorsed, with the highest frequency being for employing Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander team members (38 participants [6.8%]). A rating of poor was most common for enacting Indigenous data sovereignty and governance principles (156 participants [27.8%]). Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander respondents had significantly lower odds of perceiving high levels of adherence to ethical principles than non-Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander respondents for all ethical principles, except employing Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander team members. In particular, Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander participants had 65% lower odds of perceiving that researchers have high rates of adhering to disseminating results back to the community (odds ratio [OR], 0.35; 95% CI, 0.22-0.57), 56% lower odds of perceiving that researchers have high rates of adhering to engaging Aboriginal community in research implementation (OR, 0.44; 95% CI, 0.27-0.73), and 54% lower odds of perceiving that researchers have high rates of adhering to engaging Aboriginal community in developing research questions (OR, 0.46; 95% CI, 0.28-0.75).
Researchers are not consistently implementing all ethical practices outlined in guidelines for research involving Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people. We call for commitment from researchers, institutions and funding bodies to address shortfalls, embed processes, and hold researchers accountable to Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people, communities and the principles and guidelines they have established.
描述对开展原住民及托雷斯海峡岛民健康与医学研究的研究人员应用伦理研究实践情况的看法。
横断面在线调查。
设置、参与者：在其项目中纳入了原住民及托雷斯海峡岛民或其数据的研究人员，以及评估原住民及托雷斯海峡岛民研究的人类研究伦理委员会的现任或过往成员（过去5年）。
研究人员对15种伦理研究实践的参与程度（采用5分李克特量表，从差到优）。
561名参与者（382名研究人员[68.1%]和179名人类研究伦理委员会成员[31.9%]）完成了调查。在所有研究实践中，“优秀”评级的认可度最低，认可度最高的是聘用原住民及托雷斯海峡岛民团队成员（38名参与者[6.8%]）。在制定原住民数据主权和治理原则方面，“差”评级最为常见（156名参与者[27.8%]）。除聘用原住民及托雷斯海峡岛民团队成员外，在所有伦理原则方面，原住民及托雷斯海峡岛民受访者认为研究人员高度遵守伦理原则的可能性显著低于非原住民及托雷斯海峡岛民受访者。特别是，原住民及托雷斯海峡岛民参与者认为研究人员高度遵守将研究结果反馈给社区的比例低65%（优势比[OR]，0.35；95%置信区间，0.22 - 0.57），认为研究人员高度遵守让原住民社区参与研究实施的比例低56%（OR，0.44；95%置信区间，0.27 - 0.73），认为研究人员高度遵守让原住民社区参与研究问题制定的比例低54%（OR，0.46；95%置信区间，0.28 - 0.75）。
研究人员并未始终如一地实施涉及原住民及托雷斯海峡岛民研究的指南中概述的所有伦理实践。我们呼吁研究人员、机构和资助机构做出承诺，以解决不足之处，落实相关流程，并让研究人员对原住民及托雷斯海峡岛民、社区以及他们制定的原则和指南负责。
