Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Experience and Attitudes Toward Informed Consent in Pharmacy Practice Research: Do Pharmacists Care?

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Science and Engineering Ethics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The experience and attitudes of pharmacists towards research ethics through pharmacy practice research is largely unknown. This study sought to examine the pharmacists’ experience if they were research participants and their attitudes on the importance of informed consent in research practice. A cross-sectional survey was employed to achieve the aims of this study. The majority of 433 participating pharmacists were female (86.1%); the average age was 43.2 ± 9.5 years, and their average working experience was 15.0 ± 9.6 years. Almost half of the respondents came from a medium chain pharmacy (47.3%) in Serbia. Older pharmacists reported the experience of being informed in detail by the researcher in their practice, had an informal agreement or a written agreement before the research process started, and believed it was necessary to know their rights in research. The more experienced pharmacists reported capturing objective and distant relationships with researchers when participating in pharmacy practice research. There was a significant difference between the experience of male and female pharmacists in the study. Those employed in medium chain pharmacies believed it was necessary to have informal agreement or a written agreement before beginning the research process. Results indicated that pharmacists show positive attitudes toward informed consent and its importance and these attitudes were more emphatically expressed by older and more experienced pharmacists in Serbia.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Bond, C. (2006). Wanted: Etical approval for practice research. The International Journal of Pharmacy Practice, 14(3), 161–162.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bond, C. (2010). A science-based profession? The International Journal of Pharmacy Practice, 18(6), 321–322.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Borkowski, S. C., & Ugras, Y. J. (1992). The ethical attitudes of students as a function of age, sex and experience. Journal of Business Ethics, 11(12), 961–979.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brown, S., & Kalichman, W. (1998). Effects of training in the responsible conduct of research: A survey of graduate students in experimental sciences. Science and Engineering Ethics, 4, 487–498.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Burns, K. E., Duffett, M., Kho, M. E., Meade, M. O., Adhikari, N. K., Sinuff, T., et al. (2008). A guide for the design and conduct of self-administered surveys of clinicians. CMAJ, 179(3), 245–252.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cleeve, S., & Curry, J. (2006). Attitudes to consent: A national survey. Journal of Pediatric Surgery, 41, 368–371.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Pubishers: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. London.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cohen, J. (1992). A power primer. Psychological Bulletin, 112(1), 155–159.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Collins, D. (2003). Pre-testing survey instruments: An overview of cognitive methods. Quality of Life Research, 12, 229–238.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ellerby, D. A., Williams, A., & Winfield, A. J. (1993). The level of interest in pharmacy practice research among community pharmacists. Pharmaceutical Journal, 25, 321–322.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fajgelj, S. (2012). Methods of research behavior. Belgrade: Center for Applied Psychology.

    Google Scholar 

  • Green, R., Gregory, R., & Mason, R. (2006). Professional distance and social work: Stretching the elastic? Australian Social Work, 4(59), 449–461.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jocić, D., Krajnović, D., & Milošević, A. (2011). Ethics in relation to the researcher—respondent: A pilot study. In Second congress of pharmacists of Bosnia and Herzegovina with international participation, Banja Luka, Bosnia and Herzegovina, pp. 386–387.

  • Kalichman, M. (2007). Responding to challenges in educating for the responsible conduct of research. Academic Medicine, 82(9), 870–875.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kandeel, N., El-Nemer, A., Ali, N. M., Kassem, H., El-Setouhy, M., Elgharieb, M. E., et al. (2011). A multicenter study of the awareness and attitudes of Egyptian faculty towards research ethics: A pilot study. Journal of Empirical Research on Human Research Ethics, 6(4), 99–108.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Krajnović, D., & Jocić, D. (2012). Codes of ethics and the challenges of contemporary pharmacy practice. In Conference with international participation “Marketing in Pharmacy-pharmaceutical business in times of crisis”, Belgrade, pp. 35–37.

  • Krajnović, D., Jocić, D., & Milošević Georgiev, A. (2012). Ethics in pharmacy practice research: The relationship between researcher and participants. In World congress of pharmacy and pharmaceutical sciences, International Congress of FIP, Amsterdam.

  • Krajnović, D., Jocić, D., & Milošević Georgiev, A. (2013). Ethics in modern pharmceutical practice. Zdravstvena Zaštita, 1, 88–99.

    Google Scholar 

  • Liddell, H. (1996). Attitudes of community pharmacists regarding involvement in practice research. Pharmaceutical Journal, 256, 905–907.

    Google Scholar 

  • Machin, D., Campbell, M., Fayers, P. M., & Pinol, A. (1997). Sample size tables for clinical studies, second ed. Blackwell Science, pp. 102–104.

  • Midwinter, E. (1991). The British Gas report on attitudes to ageing 1991. London: British Gas.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pimple, K. D. (2002). Six domains of research ethics: A heuristic framework for the responsible conduct of research. Science and Engineering Ethics, 8, 191–205.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rosenbloom, K., Tayler, K., & Harding, G. (2000). Community pharmacists’ attitudes towards research. International Journal of Pharmacy Practice, 8, 103–110.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ruttan, L. (2004). Exploring ethical principles in the context of research relationships. A Journal of Aboriginal and Indigenous Community Health, 2(1), 11–28.

    Google Scholar 

  • Saini, B., Brillant, M., Filipovska, J., Gelgor, L., Mitchell, B., & Rose, G., Smith, L. (2006). Recruitment and retention of community pharmacists in pharmacy practice research. Faculty of Pharmacy, University of Sydney.

  • Sierles, F. (2003). How to do research with self-administred surveys. Academic Psychiatry, 27, 104–113.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Steneck, N. H. (2007). ORI introduction to the responsible conduct of research. Washington, DC: Department of Health and Human Services.

    Google Scholar 

  • Terpstra, D. E., Rozella, J. E., & Robinsona, R. K. (1993). The influence of personality and demographic variables on ethical decisions related to insider trading. The Journal of Psychology: Interdisciplinary and Applied, 127(4), 375–389.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Twigg, M. J., Bhattacharya, D., Poland, F., Desborough, J. A., & Wright, D. J. (2013). The views of pharmacists who participated in a community pharmacy randomised controlled trial. International Journal of Pharmacy Practice, 21(2), 128–130.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Faculty of Pharmacy, University of Belgrade, 450 Vojvode Stepe, Belgrade, Serbia

    Dušanka M. Krajnović

  2. BENU, 58-60 Resavska, Belgrade, Serbia

    Dragana D. Jocić

Authors
  1. Dušanka M. Krajnović
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Dragana D. Jocić
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Dragana D. Jocić.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Ethical Considerations

With official permission from the Pharmaceutical Chamber of Serbia Ethics Committee we have been conducting a broader study on behavioural and social aspects of pharmacy practice as a non-experimental study with mixed-mode survey design and several instruments. Data reported here were derived from one segment of this study concerning the ethical issues in research practice at community pharmacies. All participants received a full explanation of the study and were guaranteed anonymity.

Informed Consent

Informed consent was obtained from all participants included in the study. No financial compensation was given to any participant. The Ethics Committee of the Pharmaceutical Chamber of Serbia approved the study (Approval of the Ethics Committee of the Pharmaceutical Chamber of Serbia, No 687/2-2, 18/10/2011). The Ethics Committee for Clinical Research of Belgrade University Faculty of Pharmacy also approved the study (Approval of Faculty of Pharmacy, University of Belgrade, No 1850/2, 31/10/2011).

Ethical Approval

All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the Standards and operational guidance for ethics review of health-related research with human participants.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Krajnović, D.M., Jocić, D.D. Experience and Attitudes Toward Informed Consent in Pharmacy Practice Research: Do Pharmacists Care?. Sci Eng Ethics 23, 1529–1539 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11948-016-9853-3

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11948-016-9853-3

Keywords

Search

Navigation