Editor Research Audit & Service Assessments

Some nations insist for obtaining moral consent but others do not enforce. Sometimes local laws are misunderstood and due to lack of moral consent results innumerable rejections of manuscripts which do not satisfy the journals’ norms.

Many organizations take initiatives to coordinate and control moral approval of human research except audit or service analysis of other categories. Although both ways have its positive and negative impacts. It may create pressure and challenges for sovereignty and privacy, reappearances /repetitions of research studies. It may also lead to confusions in defining some studies even which is conforming to their standards.

Some nations impose identical constraints which enforce concerned people to get consent for specific study which could have been avoided but makes crucial for concerned people. The object of OARS guideline is to help journal editors in reviewing manuscripts.

The following steps are suggested by OARS for editors to be taken during editorial review of the manuscript apart from normal actions.

  •    (A). To evaluate whether it is scientifically usable, whether size is sufficient, whether there is clarity of results / outcomes, whether probable complications are taken care,   whether impartiality maintained, whether the publication will serve its purpose?
  •    (B). Whether suitable steps taken to
    • Reduce adverse effect & to skip tussle to safeguard privacy,
    • Reduce risk of physical and psychological damage
    • Maintain sovereignty (e.g. Information sheets and consent forms may be re-used for certain audits and Service evaluations as a demonstration that appropriate ethical standards are being met, without consent of research Ethics committee).
    • Ascertain various methods from researchers / examiners which were used by them to overcome above problems.
  •   (C). Whether the gains achieved in the study of a specific case compensates the damages occurred.
  •   (D). Editors are supposed to obtain and exhibit to the authors, the clarification letter from the research committee in case there is chance of misunderstanding local laws or rules.

OARS anticipate that above system is strictly adhered by editors for reviewing research papers and also followed by research ethic committee while accepting applications. It is advised to implement above process which may also act as practical guideline. It is also mandatory to have written document as a part of journal, for all the deviations obtained. Lastly, it is also expected that this guide will be user-friendly for editors and authors.