Objective: This paper describes the variety of ways that information about ethics-related methods are included or not included in public health research articles.
Methods: Information about the ethics-related content of all articles published in nine highly-respected public health journals in 2006 was extracted.
Results: Of 989 primary analyses, 73% of the articles commented on ethics committee approval or exemption, 63% mentioned participant consent and 9% indicated whether or not inducement or compensation was given. 84% of articles mentioned a funding source, but fewer than 4% identified any potential conflict of interest. Reporting rates for committee review and consent were higher for experimental than for observational studies and were comparatively higher in studies conducted among potentially vulnerable populations like children and residents of low income countries.
Conclusions: More complete reporting would facilitate the design, evaluation and comparison of future research studies.
Statistics from Altmetric.com
Competing interests: None.
Provenance and peer review: Not commissioned; externally peer reviewed.
If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.