Skip to main content

Table 2 Exploratory factor analysis: Ethics-related issues, motivators and barriers.

From: Untapped ethical resources for neurodegeneration research

Domain

Clusters of Factors

% of Variance

Cumulative % of Variance

Factor Description

Factor Loadings

Ethics Related Issues

Traditional Research Ethics

36.5%

36.5%

Recruiting subjects representing vulnerable populations (a)

0.71

    

Unrealistic expectations about benefits of the research by subjects (b)

0.65

    

Subject confidentiality (c)

0.98

    

Privacy of subjects (d)

0.96

    

Obtaining informed consent (e)

0.90

    

Equal access to research for all eligible subjects (f)

0.77

    

Safety of the method in use (h)

0.62

    

Clinical findings detected unexpectedly (i)

0.69

 

External Influences

22.7%

59.2%

Commercial conflict of interest (e.g., timing of technology roll out) (k)

0.63

    

Priorities of government/public research sponsors (l)

0.69

    

Influence of industry sponsorship on direction and topics (m)

0.67

    

Opinion of media and stakeholders (n)

0.63

    

Opinion of colleagues (o)

0.52

    

Effect of patents on publication and release of data (p)

0.66

Motivators

Ensuring Public Understanding

15.9%

15.9%

Mitigating false hopes or expectations by subjects (m)

0.77

    

Better informed public and policies (n)

0.75

    

Patients' right to be informed about neuroscience advances (o)

0.92

 

External Forces

14.6%

30.5%

Professional advancement (d)

0.78

    

Institutional encouragement (e)

0.50

    

Chance of publication success (f)

0.78

    

Positive perception by clinicians (g)

0.59

 

Requirements

13.0%

43.5%

Institutional encouragement (e)

0.55

    

Requirement by the institution where you work (h)

0.99

    

Requirement by research sponsors (i)

0.69

 

Values

10.5%

54.0%

Personal values/seems like the right thing to do (a)

0.83

    

Good citizenship (c)

0.59

 

Press and Public

8.7%

62.7%

Coverage in the press (k)

0.53

    

Positive public perception (l)

0.77

Barriers

Resources

19.3%

19.3%

Lack of relevant ethics resources (f)

0.92

    

Lack of access to colleagues with ethics expertise (g)

0.64

 

Burden

17.4%

36.7%

Increased administrative work (a)

0.72

    

Lack of time (e)

0.72

 

Concern

15.7%

52.4%

Ethics is not a relevant or effective tool for my field of research (b)

0.56

    

Not your job (c)

0.85

 

Interest

14.8%

67.2%

Lack of individual interest in ethics (h)

0.74

    

Lack of interest in ethics among neuroscience colleagues (i)

0.67