Benchmark – Ethical Conduct of Scholarly Activities

The focus of this assignment is to apply the principles detailed in the Belmont Report (https://www.hhs.gov/ohrp/regulations-and-policy/belmont-report/index.html) to case studies involving human subjects in research or a quality improvement project.

Utilize the “Ethical Conduct of Scholarly Activities” (attached) document to complete this assignment.

While APA style is not required for the body of this assignment, solid academic writing is expected, and documentation of sources should be presented using APA formatting guidelines, which can be found in the APA Style Guide, located in the Student Success Center.

This assignment uses a rubric (attached).

NRS-445 Topic

: Benchmark – Ethical Conduct of Scholarly Activities

For this assignment, students will read the two case studies that follow and then complete the application of the Belmont Principles case study tables for each case study as well as a personal reflection at the end.

Background: The Belmont Report is a foundational document in the field of research ethics. It was created in response to ethical concerns raised by the Tuskegee Syphilis Study and other research studies that exploited vulnerable populations. The Belmont Report outlines three core ethical principles for research involving human subjects: respect for persons, beneficence, and justice. Institutional review boards (IRBs) are responsible for ensuring that research studies comply with these ethical principles. The Belmont Report has had a significant impact on the formation and function of IRBs. IRBs use the principles outlined in the Belmont Report as a framework for understanding and evaluating the ethical implications of research studies. The principles of respect for persons, beneficence, and justice are used to guide decision-making around issues such as informed consent, risk-benefit analysis, and the selection of human subjects. Overall, the Belmont Report has played a crucial role in shaping the ethical standards for research involving human subjects.

Assignment Focus: The focus of this assignment is to allow the student to apply the principles detailed in the Belmont Report to case studies involving human subjects in research or a quality improvement project. Emphasis is placed on developing and demonstrating an understanding of the role of the nurse researcher or quality improvement project manager as an effective facilitator of ethical principles in human-subjects research or quality improvement projects.

Resources: Review the “NRS-445 The Belmont Report Lecture” to gain a better understanding of the Belmont Report and the role it plays in conducting research.

Case Study 1: An Experimental Trial Worth Taking?

Life-threatening cancers can end a person’s life within a matter of weeks to months. Experimental procedures such as a combination of immunotherapy and the novel medication guadecitabine are currently being investigated in a
clinical trial. In 8% of cases, the treatment has been highly successful. In one documented case, a woman with breast, colon, and lung cancers with poor odds of survival agreed to partake in receiving the experimental therapy. The experimental therapy compellingly treated the tumors; she has been cancer-free for six years. Regrettably, the treatment does not affect most people, and significant risk is involved: in some trials, the patients suffered immediate cardiac failure.

Another woman diagnosed with aggressive cancer, who doctors estimate will live for five months, has inquired about pursuing this therapy. In an extensive informed consent process over a three-week period, she and her spouse are given all the evidence-based background, the risks and benefits, and more. Once the informed consent process is completed, the woman wants to seek the experimental treatment, but her spouse does not support the decision. The woman and her spouse are from a cultural background in which the male partner of the family decides the important choices, and the pair are devoted to their cultural beliefs.

Reflection Points: Should researchers accept this woman into the clinical trial to receive the experimental therapy?

Case 2: Send Me a Message When You Can!

In an African nation, one in seven adults has HIV. Treatment is not accessible to everyone who needs it, and researchers are engrossed in creating effective, economical treatment methods for patients with HIV. The research of new drugs for HIV encounters the issue of the mobility of many African people because many people move from one area to another due to employment, political unrest, or the need to find housing. This issue makes regular contact with research participants challenging. Often, researchers are concerned that their participants will instruct their family members to obtain the experimental drugs they are supposed to have, rather than obtaining the drugs themselves, to split the treatment. This jeopardizes the research and curative value of the medication, which should be taken regularly.

Researchers suggest the use of technology to remedy multiple issues. They will scan the participants’ fingerprints and include them in an electronic database for proof that each participant is included in the research study before obtaining treatments. Researchers will also give participants mobile phones to allow the researchers to send text message reminders to participants about their study appointments and to allow rescheduling of visits. GPS tracking will be on the phones to allow researchers to locate participants when necessary, so that they can see the participants in person.

Reflection Points: Should research be conducted as described above explained? Is technology the only way to mitigate the impact of equity issues in research?

Application of the Belmont Principles: Case Study 1

Belmont Report principles and the components of each principle

Explain how the case meets the components of each principle.

Explain how the case does not meet the components of each principle.

What steps can the nurse researcher or quality improvement manager take to adhere to the ethical principles identified in the Belmont Report?

Respect for Person

Respect the right to choose, hold views, and act according to personal beliefs.

Protect those with decreased capacity to make their own choice.

Ensure voluntary participation.

Provide informed consent, explaining harms and benefits.

Beneficence

Minimize the harm/risks to the greatest extent possible.

Maximize the potential benefits.

Ensure that the rights and well-being of the patient take precedence over the needs of science.

Justice

Justly distribute the benefits and burdens of the research. Guard against using vulnerable populations.

Ensure a fair selection of research participants.

Guard against coercion and undue influence.

Avoid potential financial or other conflicts of interest.

Application of the Belmont Principles: Case Study 2

Explain how the case meets the components of each principle.

Explain how the case does not meet the components of each principle.

What steps can the nurse researcher or quality improvement manager take to adhere to the ethical principles identified in the Belmont Report?

Respect for Person
Respect the right to choose, hold views, and act according to personal beliefs.
Protect those with decreased capacity to make their own choice.
Ensure voluntary participation.
Provide informed consent, explaining harms and benefits.

Beneficence
Minimize the harm/risks to the greatest extent possible.
Maximize the potential benefits.
Ensure that the rights and well-being of the patient take precedence over the needs of science.

Belmont Report principles and the components of each principle.

Justice

· Justly distribute the benefits and burdens of the research. Guard against using vulnerable populations.

· Ensure a fair selection of research participants.

· Guard against coercion and undue influence.

· Avoid potential financial or other conflicts of interest.

Personal Reflection

In less than 250 words, discuss how the ethical principles from the Belmont Report align with the Christian worldview. Reflect on your current nursing practice and describe how these ethical principles align with your nursing practice.

image1

image2

Benchmark – Ethical Conduct of Scholarly Activities – Rubric

Case 1: Respect for Person 16.8 points

Criteria Description

Explanation of how Case Study 1 meets and does not meet the components of respect

for person, as well as steps that can be taken by nurse or quality improvement

manager to adhere to ethical principles in respect for person.

5. Target 16.8 points

Explanation of how Case Study 1 meets and does not meet the components of

respect for person, as well as steps that can be taken by nurse or quality

improvement manager to adhere to ethical principles in respect for person, is

thorough.

4. Acceptable 14.95 points

Explanation of how Case Study 1 meets and does not meet the components of

respect for person, as well as steps that can be taken by nurse or quality

improvement manager to adhere to ethical principles in respect for person, is

detailed.

3. Approaching 13.27 points

Explanation of how Case Study 1 meets and does not meet the components of

respect for person, as well as steps that can be taken by nurse or quality

improvement manager to adhere to ethical principles in respect for person, is

present.

2. Insufficient 12.6 points

Explanation of how Case Study 1 meets and does not meet the components of

respect for person, as well as steps that can be taken by nurse or quality

improvement manager to adhere to ethical principles in respect for person, is

inaccurate or incomplete.

1. Unsatisfactory 0 points

Explanation of how Case Study 1 meets and does not meet the components of

respect for person, as well as steps that can be taken by nurse or quality

improvement manager to adhere to ethical principles in respect for person, is not

present.

Collapse All

© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.

https://www.gce.com/

Case 1: Beneficence 16.8 points

Criteria Description

Explanation of how Case Study 1 meets and does not meet the components of

beneficence, as well as steps that can be taken by nurse or quality improvement

manager to adhere to ethical principles in beneficence.

5. Target 16.8 points

Explanation of how Case Study 1 meets and does not meet the components of

beneficence, as well as steps that can be taken by nurse or quality improvement

manager to adhere to ethical principles in beneficence, is thorough.

4. Acceptable 14.95 points

Explanation of how Case Study 1 meets and does not meet the components of

beneficence, as well as steps that can be taken by nurse or quality improvement

manager to adhere to ethical principles in beneficence, is detailed.

3. Approaching 13.27 points

Explanation of how Case Study 1 meets and does not meet the components of

beneficence, as well as steps that can be taken by nurse or quality improvement

manager to adhere to ethical principles in beneficence, is present.

2. Insufficient 12.6 points

Explanation of how Case Study 1 meets and does not meet the components of

beneficence, as well as steps that can be taken by nurse or quality improvement

manager to adhere to ethical principles in beneficence, is inaccurate or incomplete.

1. Unsatisfactory 0 points

Explanation of how Case Study 1 meets and does not meet the components of

beneficence, as well as steps that can be taken by nurse or quality improvement

manager to adhere to ethical principles in beneficence, is not present.

https://www.gce.com/

Case 1: Justice 16.8 points

Criteria Description

Explanation of how Case Study 1 meets and does not meet the components of justice,

as well as steps that can be taken by nurse or quality improvement manager to adhere

to ethical principles in justice.

5. Target 16.8 points

Explanation of how Case Study 1 meets and does not meet the components of

justice, as well as steps that can be taken by nurse or quality improvement manager

to adhere to ethical principles in justice, is thorough.

4. Acceptable 14.95 points

Explanation of how Case Study 1 meets and does not meet the components of

justice, as well as steps that can be taken by nurse or quality improvement manager

to adhere to ethical principles in justice, is detailed.

3. Approaching 13.27 points

Explanation of how Case Study 1 meets and does not meet the components of

justice, as well as steps that can be taken by nurse or quality improvement manager

to adhere to ethical principles in justice, is present.

2. Insufficient 12.6 points

Explanation of how Case Study 1 meets and does not meet the components of

justice, as well as steps that can be taken by nurse or quality improvement manager

to adhere to ethical principles in justice, is inaccurate or incomplete.

1. Unsatisfactory 0 points

Explanation of how Case Study 1 meets and does not meet the components of

justice, as well as steps that can be taken by nurse or quality improvement manager

to adhere to ethical principles in justice, is not present.

https://www.gce.com/

Case 2: Respect for Person 16.8 points

Criteria Description

Explanation of how Case Study 2 meets and does not meet the components of respect

for person, as well as steps that can be taken by nurse or quality improvement

manager to adhere to ethical principles in respect for person.

5. Target 16.8 points

Explanation of how Case Study 2 meets and does not meet the components of

respect for person, as well as steps that can be taken by nurse or quality

improvement manager to adhere to ethical principles in respect for person, is

thorough.

4. Acceptable 14.95 points

Explanation of how Case Study 2 meets and does not meet the components of

respect for person, as well as steps that can be taken by nurse or quality

improvement manager to adhere to ethical principles in respect for person, is

detailed.

3. Approaching 13.27 points

Explanation of how Case Study 2 meets and does not meet the components of

respect for person, as well as steps that can be taken by nurse or quality

improvement manager to adhere to ethical principles in respect for person, is

present.

2. Insufficient 12.6 points

Explanation of how Case Study 2 meets and does not meet the components of

respect for person, as well as steps that can be taken by nurse or quality

improvement manager to adhere to ethical principles in respect for person, is

inaccurate or incomplete.

1. Unsatisfactory 0 points

Explanation of how Case Study 2 meets and does not meet the components of

respect for person, as well as steps that can be taken by nurse or quality

improvement manager to adhere to ethical principles in respect for person, is not

present.

https://www.gce.com/

Case 2: Beneficence 16.8 points

Criteria Description

Explanation of how Case Study 2 meets and does not meet the components of

beneficence, as well as steps that can be taken by nurse or quality improvement

manager to adhere to ethical principles in beneficence.

5. Target 16.8 points

Explanation of how Case Study 2 meets and does not meet the components of

beneficence, as well as steps that can be taken by nurse or quality improvement

manager to adhere to ethical principles in beneficence, is thorough.

4. Acceptable 14.95 points

Explanation of how Case Study 2 meets and does not meet the components of

beneficence, as well as steps that can be taken by nurse or quality improvement

manager to adhere to ethical principles in beneficence, is detailed.

3. Approaching 13.27 points

Explanation of how Case Study 2 meets and does not meet the components of

beneficence, as well as steps that can be taken by nurse or quality improvement

manager to adhere to ethical principles in beneficence, is present.

2. Insufficient 12.6 points

Explanation of how Case Study 2 meets and does not meet the components of

beneficence, as well as steps that can be taken by nurse or quality improvement

manager to adhere to ethical principles in beneficence, is inaccurate or incomplete.

1. Unsatisfactory 0 points

Explanation of how Case Study 2 meets and does not meet the components of

beneficence, as well as steps that can be taken by nurse or quality improvement

manager to adhere to ethical principles in beneficence, is not present.

https://www.gce.com/

Case 2: Justice 16.8 points

Criteria Description

Explanation of how Case Study 2 meets and does not meet the components of justice,

as well as steps that can be taken by nurse or quality improvement manager to adhere

to ethical principles in justice.

5. Target 16.8 points

Explanation of how Case Study 2 meets and does not meet the components of

justice, as well as steps that can be taken by nurse or quality improvement manager

to adhere to ethical principles in justice, is thorough.

4. Acceptable 14.95 points

Explanation of how Case Study 2 meets and does not meet the components of

justice, as well as steps that can be taken by nurse or quality improvement manager

to adhere to ethical principles in justice, is detailed.

3. Approaching 13.27 points

Explanation of how Case Study 2 meets and does not meet the components of

justice, as well as steps that can be taken by nurse or quality improvement manager

to adhere to ethical principles in justice, is present.

2. Insufficient 12.6 points

Explanation of how Case Study 2 meets and does not meet the components of

justice, as well as steps that can be taken by nurse or quality improvement manager

to adhere to ethical principles in justice, is inaccurate or incomplete.

1. Unsatisfactory 0 points

Explanation of how Case Study 2 meets and does not meet the components of

justice, as well as steps that can be taken by nurse or quality improvement manager

to adhere to ethical principles in justice, is not present.

https://www.gce.com/

Ethical Principles, Christian Worldview, and Nursing Practice 11.2 points

Criteria Description

Discussion of how the ethical principles of the Belmont Report align with the Christian

worldview and with personal nursing practice.

5. Target 11.2 points

Discussion of how the ethical principles of the Belmont Report align with the

Christian worldview and with personal nursing practice is thorough.

4. Acceptable 9.97 points

Discussion of how the ethical principles of the Belmont Report align with the

Christian worldview and with personal nursing practice is detailed.

3. Approaching 8.85 points

Discussion of how the ethical principles of the Belmont Report align with the

Christian worldview and with personal nursing practice is present.

2. Insufficient 8.4 points

Discussion of how the ethical principles of the Belmont Report align with the

Christian worldview and with personal nursing practice is inaccurate or incomplete.

1. Unsatisfactory 0 points

Discussion of how the ethical principles of the Belmont Report align with the

Christian worldview and with personal nursing practice is not present.

https://www.gce.com/

Demonstration of Professional Aptitude for Ethical Conduct (B) (B) 14 points

Criteria Description

Overall demonstration of professional aptitude for application of ethical research

guidelines, ethical behaviors, and advocacy for the protection of participants in

scholarly initiatives and scholarly practice-based projects. (C.4.3) (C4.3)

5. Target 14 points

The learner clearly demonstrates professional aptitude for application of ethical

research guidelines, ethical behaviors, and advocacy for the protection of

participants in scholarly initiatives and scholarly practice-based projects. Rationale

is appropriate for the assignment criteria and nursing content and provides strong

support for both

factual and subjective responses throughout.

4. Acceptable 12.46 points

The learner demonstrates professional aptitude for application of ethical research

guidelines, ethical behaviors, and advocacy for the protection of participants in

scholarly initiatives and scholarly practice-based projects. Rationale is appropriate

for the assignment criteria and nursing content and provides support for both

factual and subjective responses throughout.

3. Approaching 11.06 points

The learner demonstrates adequate professional aptitude for application of ethical

research guidelines, ethical behaviors, and advocacy for the protection of

participants in scholarly initiatives and scholarly practice-based projects. Rationale

is mostly appropriate for the assignment criteria and nursing content and provides

general support for both factual and subjective responses throughout.

2. Insufficient 10.5 points

The learner inconsistently demonstrates professional aptitude in the application of

ethical research guidelines, ethical behaviors, and advocacy for the protection of

participants in scholarly initiatives and scholarly practice-based projects. Rationale

is lacking and does not reflect the assignment criteria and nursing content in many

scenarios. Overall, support for both factual and subjective responses is lacking.

1. Unsatisfactory 0 points

The learner does not demonstrate professional aptitude in the application of ethical

research guidelines, ethical behaviors, and advocacy for the protection of

participants in scholarly initiatives and scholarly practice-based projects. Rationale

is not appropriate or does not reflect the assignment criteria and nursing content.

Support for both factual and subjective responses is not provided.

https://www.gce.com/

Mechanics of Writing 8.4 points

Criteria Description

Includes spelling, capitalization, punctuation, grammar, language use, sentence

structure, etc.

5. Target 8.4 points

No mechanical errors are present. Appropriate language choice and sentence

structure are used throughout.

4. Acceptable 7.48 points

Few mechanical errors are present. Suitable language choice and sentence

structure are used.

3. Approaching 6.64 points

Occasional mechanical errors are present. Language choice is generally

appropriate. Varied sentence structure is attempted.

2. Insufficient 6.3 points

Frequent and repetitive mechanical errors are present. Inconsistencies in language

choice or sentence structure are recurrent.

1. Unsatisfactory 0 points

Errors in grammar or syntax are pervasive and impede meaning. Incorrect language

choice or sentence structure errors are found throughout.

https://www.gce.com/

Format/Documentation 5.6 points

Criteria Description

Uses appropriate style, such as APA, MLA, etc., for college, subject, and level;

documents sources using citations, footnotes, references, bibliography, etc.,

appropriate to assignment and discipline.

5. Target 5.6 points

No errors in formatting or documentation are present.

4. Acceptable 4.98 points

Appropriate format and documentation are used with only minor

errors.

3. Approaching 4.42 points

Appropriate format and documentation are used, although there are some obvious

errors.

2. Insufficient 4.2 points

Appropriate format is attempted, but some elements are missing. Frequent errors

in documentation of sources are evident.

1. Unsatisfactory 0 points

Appropriate format is not used. No documentation of sources is provided.

Total 140 points

https://www.gce.com/

Turn in your highest-quality paper
Get a qualified writer to help you with

“ Benchmark – Ethical Conduct of Scholarly Activities ”

Get high-quality paper

Guarantee! All work is written by expert writers!

Still stressed from student homework?

Get quality assistance from academic writers!

Order now