[{"data":1,"prerenderedAt":-1},["ShallowReactive",2],{"doc-seo-596846-105":3,"detail-sidebar-cat-0-en-105":81,"doc-detail-596846-en":130},{"code":4,"msg":5,"data":6},0,"ok",{"site_id":7,"language":8,"slug":9,"title":10,"keywords":11,"description":12,"schema_data":13,"social_meta":74,"head_meta":76,"extra_data":78,"updated_unix":80},105,"en","whatsthe-protocol-canadian-university-research-ethics-boards-and-variations-in-implementing-tri-council-policy","What’sthe protocol? Canadian university research ethics boards and variations in implementing Tri-Council policy","","This article examines differences in Research Ethics Board (REB) policy and application procedures across Canada and how these affect multi-jurisdictional higher-education research that collects data at universities themselves. Although Canada’s Tri-Council Policy Statement 2 (TCPS2) provides guiding principles, university REBs vary notably in practice, especially when evaluating requests from researchers outside their own institution. Data were gathered from reviews of REB applications at 69 Canadian universities, identifying different systems, revisions, and oversight needs.",{"@graph":14,"@context":73},[15,34,56],{"@type":16,"itemListElement":17},"BreadcrumbList",[18,23,27,31],{"item":19,"name":20,"@type":21,"position":22},"https://docshare.wps.com","Home","ListItem",1,{"item":24,"name":25,"@type":21,"position":26},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/","Document",2,{"item":28,"name":29,"@type":21,"position":30},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/research-report/","Research & Report",3,{"item":32,"name":10,"@type":21,"position":33},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/whatsthe-protocol-canadian-university-research-ethics-boards-and-variations-in-implementing-tri-council-policy/596846/",4,{"url":32,"name":10,"@type":35,"image":36,"author":41,"headline":10,"publisher":44,"fileFormat":47,"inLanguage":8,"description":12,"dateModified":48,"datePublished":49,"encodingFormat":47,"isAccessibleForFree":50,"interactionStatistic":51},"DigitalDocument",{"url":37,"@type":38,"width":39,"height":40},"https://docshare.wps.com/thumbnails/whatsthe-protocol-canadian-university-research-ethics-boards-and-variations-in-implementing-tri-council-policy/596846.png","ImageObject",300,407,{"name":42,"@type":43},"Danger Angel","Person",{"url":19,"name":45,"@type":46},"DocShare","Organization","application/pdf","2026-11-03","2026-10-15",true,{"@type":52,"interactionType":53,"userInteractionCount":55},"InteractionCounter",{"@type":54},"ViewAction",8,{"@type":57,"mainEntity":58},"FAQPage",[59,65,69],{"name":60,"@type":61,"acceptedAnswer":62},"What is the main question addressed by the article?","Question",{"text":63,"@type":64},"The article focuses on whose research ethics policies should be followed across jurisdictions and how differing moral guidance can be reconciled in multi-jurisdictional studies.","Answer",{"name":66,"@type":61,"acceptedAnswer":67},"How did the authors collect data for the study?",{"text":68,"@type":64},"They reviewed research ethics applications submitted to REBs at 69 universities across Canada.",{"name":70,"@type":61,"acceptedAnswer":71},"What variation did the study find among Canadian university REBs?",{"text":72,"@type":64},"REBs used different application systems and required different revisions and levels of oversight for external researchers who were not employed at the institution.","https://schema.org",{"og:url":32,"og:type":75,"og:title":10,"og:site_name":45,"og:description":12},"article",{"robots":77,"canonical":32},"index,follow",{"doc_id":79,"site_id":7},596846,1792164950,{"code":4,"msg":82,"data":83},"success",[84,88,92,96,101,106,111,114,119,122,126],{"id":22,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":85,"show_sort_weight":86,"slug":87},"Story & Novel",90,"story-novel",{"id":26,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":89,"show_sort_weight":90,"slug":91},"Literature",80,"literature",{"id":33,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":93,"show_sort_weight":94,"slug":95},"Exam",70,"exam",{"id":97,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":98,"show_sort_weight":99,"slug":100},5,"Comic",60,"comic",{"id":102,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":103,"show_sort_weight":104,"slug":105},6,"Technology",50,"technology",{"id":107,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":108,"show_sort_weight":109,"slug":110},7,"Healthcare",40,"healthcare",{"id":55,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":29,"show_sort_weight":112,"slug":113},30,"research-report",{"id":115,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":116,"show_sort_weight":117,"slug":118},9,"Religion & Spirituality",20,"religion-spirituality",{"id":117,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":120,"show_sort_weight":117,"slug":121},"World Cup","world-cup",{"id":123,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":124,"show_sort_weight":123,"slug":125},10,"Lifestyle","lifestyle",{"id":127,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":128,"show_sort_weight":97,"slug":129},19,"General","general",{"code":4,"msg":82,"data":131},{"doc_id":79,"user_id":132,"nickname":42,"user_avatar":133,"doc_module":4,"category_id":55,"category_name":29,"doc_title":10,"doc_description":12,"doc_content":134,"file_id":135,"file_url":136,"file_type":137,"file_size":138,"view_count":55,"is_deleted":4,"is_public":22,"is_downloadable":22,"audit_status":22,"page_count":139,"language":140,"language_code":8,"site_id":7,"html_lang":8,"table_of_contents":141,"faqs":142,"seo_title":143,"seo_description":12,"update_tm":144,"read_time":145,"preview_page_count":4},962090769052,"https://ap-avatar.wpscdn.com/davatar_9964176cb1d06d4a9deccf72a44ae3dc","What’sthe protocol? Canadian university research ethics boards and variations in implementing Tri-Council policy  \nGrace Karram Stephenson OISE, University of Toronto  \nGlen A. Jones  \nOISE, University of Toronto  \nEmmanuelle Fick  \nOISE, University of Toronto  \nOlivier Bégin-Caouette Université de Montréal  \nAamir Taiyeb  \nOISE, University of Toronto  \nAmy Metcalfe  \nUniversity of British Columbia  \nAbstract  \nThis article is concerned with the differences in REB policy and application processes across Canada as they impact multi-jurisdictional, higher education research projects that collect data at universities themselves. Despite the guiding principles of the Tri-Council Policy Statement 2 (TCPS2) there is significant variation among the practices of Research Ethics Boards (REBs) at Canada’s universities, particularly when they respond to requests from researchers outside their own institution. The data for this paper were gathered through a review of research ethics applications at 69 universities across Canada. The findings suggest REBs use a range of different application systems and require different revisions and types of oversight for researchers who are not employed at their institution. This paper recommends further harmonization between REBs across the country and national-level dialogue on TCPS2 interpretations.  \nKeywords: research ethics, university ethics, higher education, social science research, harmonization  \nRésumé  \nCet article étudie les différences entre politiques institutionnelles en matière d’éthique à la recherche et les procéduresd’évaluation qui encadrent les travaux des comités d’éthique à la recherche (CER), en particulier lorsqu’il s’agit de projets de recherche en sciences sociales menés dans des universités de différentes provinces. Malgré l’adhésion générale aux principes directeurs du deuxième Énoncé de politique des trois Conseils (EPTC2), les pratiques des CER diffèrent, en particulierlorsqu’il s’agit de répondre à des chercheurs issus d’autres universités. Cette étude s’appuie sur une analyse des demandes d’évaluation soumises aux CER de 69 universités canadiennes. Les résultats suggèrent que les CER utilisent différents mécanismes de dépôt, exigent différents niveaux de révision et supervisent différemment les études dirigées par des chercheursd’autres établissements. Cet article recommande une plus grande harmonisation des procédures des CER canadiens.  \nMots-clés : d’éthique à la recherche, harmonisation, l'enseignement supérieur, science sociale  \nIntroduction  \n“Whose policies ought to be followed? What is the moral force of one policy against another? When studies are pursued across multiple jurisdictions, how should conflicting moral guidance be reconciled?”(Kimmelman, McDonald, & Avard, 2011, p. 7)  \nAcademic researchers across Canada can attest to the vigilant precision of research ethics boards (REBs) in  \nscrutinizing the safety of research proposals involving human participants. Many institutions develop support systems and offer workshops to ensure professors and students are adequately trained to file applications with their REB. However, despite the comprehensiveness of REB systems within institutions, there is significant variation among institutions. For example, some institutions require researchers to submit a full literature review while others do not. Likewise, some institutions  \nCanadian Journal of Higher Education | Revue canadienne d’enseignement supérieur 50:1 (2020)   \nensure their researchers complete the Tri-Council’s online course on ethical research while others do not. This article examines the practices of university REBs across Canada and considers how federal-level policy is implemented differently at different institutions. Variations in REB requirements have significant implications for national social science research on higher education and raise questions about who is responsible for research design and dissemination.  \nSince the first edition of","cbCailnk1pp26zwZ","https://ap.wps.com/l/cbCailnk1pp26zwZ","pdf",190652,14,"English","# Abstract\n# Introduction\n## Tri-Council policy and REB responsibilities\n## Variation across institutions and implications\n# Findings and recommendations","[{\"question\":\"What is the main question addressed by the article?\",\"answer\":\"The article focuses on whose research ethics policies should be followed across jurisdictions and how differing moral guidance can be reconciled in multi-jurisdictional studies.\"},{\"question\":\"How did the authors collect data for the study?\",\"answer\":\"They reviewed research ethics applications submitted to REBs at 69 universities across Canada.\"},{\"question\":\"What variation did the study find among Canadian university REBs?\",\"answer\":\"REBs used different application systems and required different revisions and levels of oversight for external researchers who were not employed at the institution.\"}]","What’sthe protocol? Canadian university research ethics boards and variations in implementing Tri-Council policy | PDF",1792083845,35]