Published: 2017-03-25

Knowledge, attitude and practice of research ethics among medical faculty in a teaching hospital

Swetha Munoli, Niveditha G., Deepthi R.


Background: To assess the knowledge, attitudes and practice of medical faculty regarding research ethics and research ethics committees (RECs).

Methods: A cross-sectional, questionnaire-based study was conducted in ESIC medical colleges in Bangalore among faculty using a validated questionnaire. Questions were designed to assess the knowledge, attitudes and practice of medical faculty regarding research ethics and research ethics committees. Statistical analysis was done using descriptive statistics and chi-square tests.

Results: Majority (76%) of faculty had not undergone training in research ethics. Less than half of the participants answered correctly to a question on guidelines in research ethics, 60% responded correctly to question on research involving children. Majority responded correctly to question on role of a research ethics committee and confidentiality, informed consent and to question on composition of Institutional Ethics Committee. 68% taught that ethical review of research by an ethics committee would delay research. >90% were favourable towards research ethics training. Faculty held attitudes regarding certain research ethics practices that were not optimal, 96% believed that it is okay to fabricate data, 68% taught that if no surrogate is available to give informed consent for vulnerable groups, they could still be included.

Conclusions: We conclude that among the medical faculties participating in our study, there is acceptance of RECs and training in research ethics, while there are knowledge gaps in research ethics guidelines, research involving children. There is need to train researchers and students to make them aware about various aspects of research.


Attitude, Ethics committee research, Ethics, informed consent, Medical

Full Text:



Normile D. The promise and pitfalls of clinical trials overseas, Science. 2008;322(5899):214-6.

World Health Organization. Declaration of Helsinki-Ethical Principles for Medical Research Involving Human Subjects; 2008.

Council for International Organizations of Medical Sciences (CIOMS), International Ethical Guidelines for Biomedical Research Involving Human Subjects, Council for International Organizations of Medical Sciences, Geneva, Switzerland; 2002.

Muaz F. Family, patient and physician in medical decision making. Hastings Center Report. 2000;6:28-37.

El-Dessouky HF, Abdel-Aziz AM, Ibrahim C, Moni M, Abul Fadl R, Silverman H. Knowledge, awareness, and attitudes about research ethics among dental faculty in the middle east: A pilot study. Int J Dent. 2011;2011:694759.

Eastwood S, Derish P, Leash E, Ordway S. Ethical issues in biomedical research: perceptions and practices of postdoctoral research fellows responding to a survey. Science and Engineering Ethics. 1996;2(1):89-114.

Fanelli D. How many scientists fabricate and falsify research? A systematic review and meta-analysis of survey data. PLoS ONE. 2009;4(5):5738.

Asem N, Silverman HJ. Perspectives of faculty at Cairo University towards research ethics and informed consent. In Proceedings of the Public Responsibility in Medicine and Research (PRIM and R ’06), Nashville, Tenn, USA; 2009.

Taiwo OO, Kass N. Post-consent assessment of dental subjects’ understanding of informed consent in oral health research in Nigeria, BMC Medical Ethics. 2009;10(1):11.

Mallela KK, Walia R, Devi TM, Das M, Sepolia S, Sethi P. Knowledge, Attitudes and Practice about Research Ethics among Dental Faculty in the North India. Journal of International Oral Health. 2015;7(2):52-6.