Interim report on the Joint International Society for Environmental Epidemiology (ISEE)—Global Environmental Epidemiology Network (GEENET) Ethics Survey

• Published in: Science of the total environment 1996-05, Vol.184 (1), p.5-11
• Main Authors: Soskolne, Colin L., Jhangri, Gian S., Hunter, Brad, Close, Melanie
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Subjects: Analysis. Health state; Biological and medical sciences; Environmental epidemiology; Epidemiology; Ethics survey; General aspects; Global Environmental Epidemiology Network; International Society for Environmental Epidemiology; Italian Epidemiological Association; Medical sciences; Public health. Hygiene; Public health. Hygiene-occupational medicine
• ISSN: 0048-9697; 1879-1026
• DOI: 10.1016/0048-9697(95)04981-9

An ethics survey was conducted in the first quarter of 1994 among environmental epidemiologists worldwide. The target populations were reached through mailings from the International Society for Environmental Epidemiology (ISEE), the Italian Epidemiological Association (ITALY) and the Global Environmental Epidemiology Network (GEENET) managed by the Office of Global and Integrated Environmental Health of the World Health Organization, Geneva. Response rates of about 30% among both the ISEE ( n = 55 out of 184) and the ITALY ( n = 35 out of 120) groups were consistent with those in other ethics surveys conducted in the recent past, but the response rate was only 19% for the GEENET group ( n = 253 out of 1340). The latter may have been because of the heterogeneity of the GEENET membership. A total of 346 returned questionnaires were used in the analysis. The survey focused on statements of values and principles grouped into nine major areas; there existed a range of disagreement with regard to acceptance of these statements. Greatest disagreement concerned the role of the environmental epidemiologist as ‘dispassionate scientist’ or ‘passionate advocate’. Case studies also were solicited; 37% of case studies involved ‘standards of practice’, followed by ‘confidentiality/disclosure’ issues (15%). Nearly one-third of the respondents provided a case study. The usefulness of these case studies in training programs is self-evident. A desire to learn more about ethics was indicated by 70% of the respondents, with 41% wishing to participate further in the integration of ethics into the research, practice and teaching of environmental epidemiology. A basis exists for future planning of professional ethics initiatives.