Ethics Performance Measurement Annual Report 2015–2016

Table of Contents

Introduction

This is the first annual report prepared by CIHR, framed by the CIHR Ethics Action Plan, and detailing the results of the performance metrics set out in the Ethics Performance Measurement Strategy (PM Strategy), as endorsed by the CIHR Standing Committee on Ethics.

This report represents an important milestone for ethics at CIHR, providing baseline data for comparisons over time with respect to CIHR’s performance in meeting its commitments. As set out in the Ethics Action Plan, CIHR has committed to:

Implementation of the Ethics PM Strategy has necessitated putting in place new processes and methods for systematic collection of data. In some cases, particularly for long-term impacts of CIHR’s investments in grants and awards related to ethics, the data will come on stream in the future.

Efforts were made to keep performance indicators (and associated data collection requirements) in the Ethics PM Strategy to a manageable level while still ensuring key performance elements were covered. A consequence of this streamlined approach is that a process to systematically collect data on activities of CIHR Institutes with respect to national and international leadership in ethics was not put in place in time for reporting in 2015–2016. This could be another area for expansion of data collection and reporting in future years.

1. Results Highlights

The Ethics PM Strategy outlines the intended transformative outcomes set out for Ethics at CIHR and sets out indicators for measuring performance against these outcomes. Highlights of the results available for 2015–2016 are reported under key outcome areas.

Key Outcomes Measuring Performance: Results Highlights for 2015–2016
Advancing Knowledge: CIHR ethics leadership strengthened at a national level
  • CIHR staff or representatives gave presentations at two national meetings related to ethics.
  • CIHR has made extensive updates to ethics content on its website, and published the Ethics Action Plan, the CIHR Chief Scientific Officer’s Communiqué on Ethics, and the Ethics PM Strategy.
  • CIHR has been active in promoting ethics education through its online Ethics Office Education Workbook. Baseline web metrics for ethics education web pages are reported.
Informing Decision-making: Strengthened accountability for ethics within CIHR
  • CIHR has integrated accountabilities for ethics and ethics stakeholders on the majority of its governance bodies, advisory bodies, and internal committees and working groups.
  • The Governing Council's Standing Committee on Ethics (SCE) has addressed 16 issues since it was established in September 2014 with a renewed mandate and membership, and 15 of those issues have become action items for CIHR.
Building Capacity: Strengthened and expanded national ethics knowledge base
  • Baseline data on the number of ethics-related grants and awards with active funding in 2015–2016 are reported.
  • With the endorsement of the SCE, CIHR expanded the scope of grants and awards data collection for "ethics" to include: grants and awards that relate directly to ethics, or indirectly to ethics (i.e., law, and a subset of socio-cultural factors affecting health), to be reported separately. Given the new scope for grants and awards data collection, the results reported in 2015–2016 will constitute a baseline for future comparisons over time.
Building Capacity: Strengthened ethics research community in Canada
  • For a subset of Priority-Driven funding opportunities launched in 2015–2016, the Ethics Office provided ethics advice which was incorporated in a majority of cases.
  • A full picture of the number of ethics-related grants and awards and ethics researchers funded through Priority-Driven funding opportunities launched over the course of 2015–2016 will become available in future years.

2. Advancing knowledge: CIHR ethics leadership strengthened at a national level

2.1 Indicators

  1. Number of education sessions/webinars/publications
  2. Number of participants in ethics education events
  3. Percentage satisfaction rate of participants after education session
  4. Number of hits on ethics education webpages
  5. Number of external presentations, meetings (national and international), and public products related to ethics at CIHR

2.2 Results

a) Education sessions/webinars/publications:

b)- c) Number of participants in ethics education events and satisfaction rate

d) Number of hits on ethics education webpages (in both official languages unless reported separately):

e) External presentations and public products:

2.3 Detailed Results

2.3.1 Ethics Education

The CIHR Ethics Office Education Workbook consists of a Knowledge-to-Action/Ethics framework, and a series of scenarios where an ethics lens is applied and discussed. Plans are to develop new case studies for the Workbook in 2016–2017. Ethics education sessions using the Education Workbook are listed in the table.

Ethics Education Sessions with Date Audiences Description
Alberta Innovates Nov 2015
Dec 2015
Employees Ethics Education: Two separate sessions were delivered by the Ethics Office via video-conference. Covered: the Education Workbook with one case on social media and one on transgender issues. Remote delivery: attendance and evaluation not collected.
Canadian Association of Research Ethics Boards (CAREB) National Conference May 2015 CAREB members Ethics Education: Delivered by a researcher at the request of the Ethics Office. Covered: the Education Framework and one case study on social media developed by the Ethics Office (different from the one mentioned above).  Attendance and evaluation not collected.
Canadian GE3LS and Health Services & Policy Research Conference (CIHR Institute of Genetics) April 2015 Trainees Ethics Education: Delivered by a researcher at the request of the Ethics Office. Covered: the Education Workbook and one case study on genomics and GE3LS. Attendance and evaluation not collected.

CIHR hosted two education events with guest speakers as part of the Canadian Bioethics Society’s National Health Ethics Week 2015, which were held in March 2015 and therefore fall outside of the 2015–2016 scope of this report. There were 33 staff in total who participated in these sessions, and responses on the post-session evaluation surveys indicated high satisfaction levels. CIHR’s two education sessions as part of the National Health Ethics Week 2016 were held in April 2016, and will be reported in the Annual Report 2016–2017.

2.3.2 Ethics Education Webpages

During 2015–2016, the ethics education content on the CIHR website in both official languages was reviewed over the course of 921 sessions (i.e., visits to pages within the CIHR website within a given timeframe). While this represents a small proportion (0.07%) of the total sessions on the CIHR website, this is nonetheless particularly successful because the visits were deliberate (i.e., the average length of time spent on a page was over two minutes).

Most of these sessions originated in Canada (64%), the United States (8%), France (4%), and the United Kingdom (3%). However, some quality visits also originated in Cameroon (2%), Algeria (1%), French Guiana (<1%), Mali (<1%), and Madagascar (<1%). In addition, two YouTube videos of education sessions using the Workbook were viewed by 12 people in 2015–2016.

Comparing the traffic on the ethics education web pages to other web content on the CIHR site would not be informative, as this content has a specific objective and reach that is not similar to other CIHR projects.  These web metrics will serve as a baseline for comparison going forward; however, we may consider establishing targets on a forward-looking basis (e.g., monitoring trends in traffic as they relate to events).

2.3.3 External presentations at National Meetings and Public Products

External presentations (not including ethics education sessions reported in section 2.3.1) and public products in 2015–2016 are listed in the following table.

External Presentations at National Meetings Date Audiences Description
Canadian Association of Research Ethics Boards (CAREB) National Conference May 2015 CAREB members CIHR Update: Delivered for CIHR by the Executive Director of the Secretariat on Responsible Conduct of Research
Canadian Bioethics Society (CBS) Annual Conference May 2015 CBS members CIHR Update: Presented by the CIHR Chief Scientific Officer (CSO). Covered: approval by Governing Council of the SCE’s Terms of Reference; and SCE’s achievements since 2014.
Public Products Date Audiences Description
Web updates September 2015 All stakeholders, public Updated Ethics @ CIHR content, Ethics Reform content, Responsible Conduct of Research content, Learning content, News content.
March 2016 All stakeholders, public Improvements to landing page (e.g., rotating banner), updated events page, updated contact information page (linking to the Government Electronic Directory Service).
External Presentations at National Meetings Date Audiences Description
Ethics Action Plan September 2015 CIHR, health ethics community Posted on website. Promotion was delayed due to the federal election period. Document was subsequently promoted in conjunction with the Performance Measurement Strategy, via the CIHR CSO Communiqué, and featured on the CIHR Ethics landing page
Communiqué from the CIHR CSO March 2016 All stakeholders, public Sent by email to: SCE, CBS, CAREB, and CIHR Scientific Directors. Posted on the CIHR website, featured on: CIHR home page, Twitter, Monthly e-bulletin.
Ethics Performance Measurement Strategy March 2016 CIHR, health ethics community Posted on website, promoted via Communiqué from the CIHR CSO, and featured on ethics landing page.

In addition:

3. Informing decision-making: Strengthened accountability for ethics within CIHR

3.1 Indicators

  1. Percentage of CIHR governance & advisory committees that include ethics stakeholders
  2. Number of issues addressed by SCE that become action items for CIHR
  3. Number of CIHR policies containing an ethics component
  4. Ratio of internal committees and working groups where ethics is present (such as the Partnerships Risk Working Group) and not present

3.2 Results

a) Governance and Advisory Bodies:

b) SCE Issues becoming CIHR Action Items:

c) CIHR Policies:

d) Internal Committees and Working Groups:

3.3 Definitions

Advisory bodies are defined as CIHR-led bodies active in 2015–2016 which provide advice to CIHR, do not have decision-making authority, and are not part of the formal governance structure of CIHR.

Ethics being present on internal committees and working groups is defined as having a member who is one of the following:

Ethics component of a policy is defined as content that explicitly refers to ethics or ethical concepts, or compliance with ethical policies.

Ethics stakeholders on governance and advisory bodies are defined as one of the following:

Governance bodies are defined as bodies operational in 2015–2016 that form part of the governance structure of CIHR for decision-making purposes. Subcommittees of decision-making bodies were included as "governance bodies", since these subcommittees form part of the official governance structure of CIHR with respect to their role of bringing recommendations to the governance body for decision.

Policy is defined as:

The following were not considered to be science-related "Policies": federal laws that apply to CIHR-funded research; CIHR strategic frameworks; CIHR education tools such as guides for applicants or peer reviewers; and internal CIHR policies governing such things as financial and human resource management or approval procedures.

3.4 Detailed Results

3.4.1 Governance

CIHR has 10 formal governance bodies (defined as bodies that form part of the governance structure of CIHR for decision-making purposes). These bodies are listed below, with ethics representation indicated where present.

Governance bodies (2015–2016) Ethics stakeholders on governance body
1. Governing Council (GC)
  • Individual who is expected to bring an ethics perspective (external individual).
    A member of Governing Council chairs the GC Standing Committee on Ethics, and is responsible for reporting back to GC on SCE activities, including any recommendations for GC decision.
2. GC Executive Committee
  • Staff with ethics as a corporate responsibility at CIHR, as evident in the title of their position or direct corporate reporting
3. GC Audit Committee --
4. GC Stem Cell Oversight Committee
  • Individuals who are expected to bring an ethics perspective (external individuals).
5. GC Standing Committee on Ethics
  • Staff with ethics as a corporate responsibility at CIHR, as evident in the title of their position or direct corporate reporting (ex-officio members)
  • Individuals who are expected to bring an ethics perspective (staff and external individuals).
6. GC Nominating and Governance Committee
  • Individual who is expected to bring an ethics perspective (external individual).
    In 2015–2016 the GC member who is the Chair of the GC Standing Committee on Ethics was also a member of the GC Nominating and Governance Committee.
7. Executive Management Committee (EMC)
  • Staff with ethics as a corporate responsibility at CIHR, as evident in the title of their position or direct corporate reporting
8. Extended EMC
  • Staff with ethics as a corporate responsibility at CIHR, as evident in the title of their position or direct corporate reporting
9. Science Council (SC)
  • Staff with ethics as a corporate responsibility at CIHR, as evident in the title of their position or direct corporate reporting
10. SC Subcommittee on Implementation and Oversight
  • Staff with ethics as a corporate responsibility at CIHR, as evident in the title of their position or direct corporate reporting

3.4.2 Advisory Bodies

CIHR led or co-led 27 advisory bodies in 2015–2016, including the 13 Institute Advisory Boards. These bodies are listed in the following table, with ethics representation indicated where present.

CIHR-led Advisory Body Ethics stakeholders
1. Canadian Clinical Trials Coordinating Centre Research Ethics Board Working Group on Accreditation
  • Individuals who are expected to bring an ethics perspective (staff and external individuals).
2. CIHR HIV/AIDS Community-Based Research Steering Committee
  • Individuals who are expected to bring an ethics perspective (external individuals).
3. CIHR HIV/AIDS Research Advisory Committee --
4. Drug Safety and Effectiveness Network Science Advisory Committee --
5. Drug Safety and Effectiveness Network Steering Committee --
6. CIHR Ethical, Legal and Social Issues (ELSI) Advisory Committee for the Canadian Longitudinal Study on Aging
  • Individuals who are expected to bring an ethics perspective (staff and external individuals).
7. Ethics Advisory Committee on Innovative Clinical Trials
  • Individuals who are expected to bring an ethics perspective (staff and external individuals).
8. Evidence Informed Health Care Renewal Working Group --
9. National Steering Committee for Canada's Strategy for Patient-Oriented Research
  • Staff with ethics as a corporate responsibility at CIHR, as evident in the title of their position or direct corporate reporting  (ex-officio member)
10. President's Advisory Committee on eHealth Innovation --
11. Sub-committee on SPOR: External Data group on Data Strategy for SUPPORT Units
  • Individuals who are expected to bring an ethics perspective (external individuals).
12. Tri-Council (TC3) Data Management Plan Advisory Committee --
13. Tri-Council Harmonization Project Advisory Group --
14. Interim College of Reviewers Advisory Group --
Plus 13 Institute Advisory Boards (IABs)*
*These IABs were in operation through to April 2016.  A new IAB system has been put in place as of 2016–2017.
9 out of 13 IABs have :
  • Individuals who are expected to bring an ethics perspective (external individuals).

3.4.3 SCE Issues that became Action Items for CIHR

The SCE held six face to face meetings during the period from September 2014 through March 2016, and convened via subgroup teleconferences as needed. A single broad issue may have been discussed at more than one meeting of the SCE, with different aspects highlighted for SCE attention, but was only counted once.

The 15 issues addressed by the SCE that resulted in CIHR actions are:

A detailed summary of the issues and resulting actions is provided in Appendix 1.

The issue "Innovative Methods for Clinical Trials" was brought to the SCE but CIHR considered that follow up action was not needed because of other work underway in Canada that overlapped in scope.

3.4.5 CIHR Policies containing an Ethics Component

Nine out of 12 CIHR and Tri-Council policies in effect in 2015–2016, and applicable to CIHR-funded research, contained an ethics component. These policies were:

The ethics content in these nine policies is summarized in the following table:

CIHR and Tri-Council Policies Summary of Ethics Component
  • CIHR Grants and Awards Guide
  • Expectation that gender and sex will be integrated into research designs when appropriate, as per the Health Portfolio SGBA Policy and TCPS 2.
  • CIHR Grants and Awards Guide
  • Tri-Agency Financial Administration Guide
  • Agreement on the Administration of Agency Grants and Awards by Research Institutions
  • Requirement for grant and awards recipients and institutions to comply with applicable ethical, legal and regulatory requirements
  • Agreement on the Administration of Agency Grants and Awards by Research Institutions
  • Requirement for institutions to avoid or mitigate any conflicts of interest
  • Tri-Agency Open Access Policy on Publications
  • Requirement for grant and award recipients to comply with any additional data preservation, retention and protection policies and practices of the grant recipient's institution and research ethics board
  • Tri-Agency Financial Administration Guide
  • Statement that allegations of breaches of Agency policies are addressed in the Tri-Agency Framework: Responsible Conduct of Research
  • Tri-Agency Responsible Conduct of Research  Framework
  • Research integrity policy and enforcement
  • Tri-Council Policy Statement: Ethical Conduct for Research Involving Humans 2nd edition 2014
  • Guidance on ethical conduct of research involving humans
  • Conflict of Interest and Confidentiality Policy of Federal Research Funding Organizations
  • Management of conflict of interest in peer review, and confidentiality of peer review information, and enforcement of the policy
  • Health Portfolio Sex and Gender-Based Analysis Policy
  • References to federal policy commitments to major international instruments concerning human rights and gender equality, and the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedom
  • CIHR Policy Statement on Official Languages
  • Intention to facilitate equitable access to CIHR programs and services for health research stakeholders in official language minority communities

The three CIHR policies without explicit ethics components have very specific procedural objectives, as described in the following table.

Policies not containing an ethics component Policy Objectives
CIHR Policy Statement: Electronic Final Reports Requires grantees to provide final reports to assist CIHR in evaluating its programs and measure the impacts of its funding.
Public Communications Policy of the Federal Research Funding Organizations Requires Institutions and Agencies to collaborate to inform the public about Agency grants and awards, and impacts.
CIHR Policy on the Institutional Electronic Approval of Applications Requires institutions to electronically approve applications submitted by Nominated Principal Investigators at their institutions.

4. Building capacity: Strengthened and expanded national ethics knowledge base

4.1 Scope of Grants and Awards Data Collection for "Ethics"

The CIHR Standing Committee on Ethics (SCE) at its March 2016 meeting endorsed an expanded scope of grants and awards data collection for the Ethics PM Strategy to include grants and awards that relate directly to ethics, or indirectly to ethics (i.e., law and a subset of socio-cultural factors affecting health), to be reported separately.

Figure 1. Scope of Grants and Awards Data Collection: Directly and Indirectly Related to Ethics

As illustrated in Figure 1, grants and awards with ethics as a primary focus, and as a non-primary focus (i.e., where ethics is a component of a grant or award but not the main focus), were included in the analysis, since ethics is the main focus of the Ethics PM Strategy. Grants and awards exploring law or relevant socio-cultural factors were included only as a primary focus, thus minimizing the counting of grants and awards in more than one category. However, it was possible for grants and awards to fit into the category of Ethics Non-Primary Focus, as well as Law-Primary Focus or Socio-Cultural Primary Focus (the overlapping areas in Figure 1).

Operational definitions for ethics, law, and social-cultural factors related to ethics, were also endorsed, with an expectation that the CIHR Ethics Office would further refine the inclusion and exclusion criteria for the socio-cultural category to minimize overlap with standard CIHR reports on investments related to the broad theme of "Social, Cultural, Environmental and Population Health Research". The Ethics Office's process for refining the inclusion and exclusion criteria and validating relevant grants and awards is described in Appendix 2. The operational definitions for each category endorsed by the SCE for the purposes of the Ethics PM Strategy, and further refined during the validation process, are provided in Appendix 3.

Ethics-related grants and awards for which funding had started in previous years and continued in 2015–2016, or funding was initiated in 2015–2016, were included in the analysis. These constitute all grants and awards "actively" funded in 2015–2016. In addition, a separate analysis was conducted that included only those grants and awards for which funding started in 2015–2016.

Given the newly broadened scope for grants and awards data collection to include all those directly or indirectly related to ethics, the results reported in 2015–2016 will constitute a baseline for future comparisons over time.

4.2 Indicators

  1. Percentage of total CIHR expenditures for ethics research (i.e., ethics-related grants and awards)
  2. Number of ethics grants and awards in the investigator-initiated research and priority-driven research opportunities

See Appendix 5-1(a) for details on indicators for which data will be available in future.

4.3 Results

These results constitute baseline data for grants and awards funded in 2015–2016, to be used for comparisons over time. “Actively funded” refers to grants and awards for which funding started or continued in 2015–2016. “New” grants and awards had funding start in 2015–2016.

Double-counting was minimal: for all actively funded grants and awards, three “Ethics Non-Primary Focus” grants/awards were also counted in the Socio-cultural category (of which two had funding start in 2015–2016).

a) Percentage of total CIHR expenditures for ethics-related grants and awards in 2015–2016:

Scope Actively funded G & A in 2015-2016(New and Continuing) New G & A in 2015-2016
% of CIHR Total ($973 million) % of CIHR Total ($226 million)
Note. “G & A” refers to grants and awards. Expenditures for “Ethics as a Non-Primary Focus” cannot be reported because there are no data on amounts for grants/awards budgets allocated to ethics components.
Ethics-Primary Focus 0.37% ($3.58 million) 0.32% ($0.72 million)
Law-Primary Focus 0.06% ($0.56 million) 0.11% ($0.25 million)
Socio-Cultural Factors related to Ethics-Primary Focus 1.66% ($16.17 million) 2.16% ($4.90 million)

b) Number of ethics-related grants and awards in the investigator-initiated research and priority-driven research opportunities

Figure 2. Number of Actively Funded (New and Continuing) Ethics-related Grants and Awards in 2015–2016, and Percentage of CIHR Total Grants and Awards, by Funding Type.

Figure 2 long description
  Investigator-Initiated Priority-Driven
Ethics - Primary Focus 16 33
Ethics - Non-Primary Focus 12 7
Law - Primary Focus 5 6
Socio-Cultural Factors Related To Ethics - Primary Focus 108 120

Note. CIHR funded a total of 8201 grants and awards (new and continuing) in 2015–2016.

Figure 3. Number of New Ethics-related Grants and Awards in 2015–2016, and % of CIHR Total New Grants and Awards, by Funding Type.

Figure 3 long description
Investigator-Initiated Priority-Driven
Ethics - Primary Focus 6 19
Ethics - Non-Primary Focus 6 3
Law - Primary Focus 1 3
Socio-Cultural Factors Related To Ethics - Primary Focus 34 72

Note. CIHR funded a total of 2798 new grants and awards in 2015–2016.

Detailed results for Ethics-related Grants and Awards by Program (research operating grants, training and career support awards, etc.) are provided in Appendix 4.

4.4 Definitions

Awards are funded through Investigator-initiated and Priority-driven sources, and refer to funding to researchers and trainees to support training (Master's, PhD, Postdoctoral Fellow) or career advancement (Chairs, salary awards). Travel awards and prizes are also included in this category.

Grants are funded through Investigator-initiated and Priority-driven sources, and include support for the direct costs of research projects; and support for conferences and workshops to establish research priorities; researcher networking and collaborative activities; scientific exchanges between Canadian and international researchers; programs that inform researchers and other stakeholders about aspects of health research; and grants to selected organizations engaged in research-related activities such as the Canadian Council on Animal Care.

Investigator-Initiated funding type (also known as "curiosity-driven" or "open" funding) refers to funding through competitions open to any area of health research.

Priority-Driven funding type (also known as "strategic" funding) refers to funding through initiatives by CIHR and its Institutes to address a specific area of need. Priority-driven research includes grants and awards funded through Signature and Strategic Initiatives, CIHR Institute funding opportunities, Catalyst Grants in specific areas of research such as ethics, and "Priority Announcements" (PAs) on open competitions (which offer additional sources of funding for highly rated applications that are relevant to specific CIHR research priority areas or mandates).

5. Building capacity: Strengthened ethics research community in Canada

5.1 Indicators

  1. Number of funding opportunities of Institutes and Initiatives for which an ethics perspective was offered at the design stage
  2. Number of funding opportunities of Institutes and Initiatives for which an ethics perspective was offered and incorporated as appropriate

See Appendix 5-2 (a-f) for details on indicators for which data will be available in future.

5.2 Results

The results capture the efforts of the CIHR Ethics Office to provide an ethics perspective in the design of Priority-Driven funding opportunities.

a) Ethics perspective offered in development of targeted funding opportunities:

b) Ethics perspective incorporated in targeted funding opportunities:

5.3 Definitions

Ethics content was defined as explicit reference in the funding opportunity to any of the following:

The standard statement in funding opportunities that applicants must comply with ethical guidelines and Tri-Council policies was not counted as “ethics content” for the purposes of this indicator.

5.4 Detailed Results

A total of 73 Priority-Driven funding opportunities were launched in 2015–2016. Of these, 21 funding opportunities contained ethics content. The Ethics Office provided ethics content at some stage in the design of 12 of these 21 funding opportunities. Advice on ethics content in funding opportunities may come from a number of sources in addition to the Ethics Office, such as: other CIHR staff, including Institutes, with experience in ethics; members of the external community with ethics expertise; and Institute Advisory Board Ethics Designates. Also, the inclusion of a statement about the need to “consider ethical implications” of the proposed research, or similar wording, may be standard practice for some initiatives.

6. Indicators for which data will be available in future

Data were available for 13 of the 28 indicators in the Ethics PM Strategy. With respect to data collection for the remaining indicators:

More details are provided in Appendix 5.

Conclusion

This report on 2015–2016 activities describes how CIHR is meeting its commitments under the Ethics Action Plan, and provides baseline data to measure success over time.

In future years, a more complete picture of the middle and long term impacts of CIHR’s work in ethics will become evident as data collection is expanded and enhanced.

Appendix 1: Summary of Standing Committee on Ethics (SCE) Issues and CIHR Action Taken, September 2014 – March 2016

Issue Date issue was first submitted and by whom Request(s) to SCE at one or more meetings on this topic CIHR Actions Status
(as of July 2016)
1. Evaluation and Data (Ethics Action Plan) Sept 2014, CIHR Science, Knowledge Translation and Ethics (SKTE) Branch Advise on the development of a Performance Measurement Strategy (PM Strategy) for Ethics, including how to capture the impact of ethics activities within open programs and strategic initiatives
  • CIHR refined the Ethics PM Strategy, including a new scope and operational definitions for CIHR grants and awards investments in research, endorsed by SCE.
  • CIHR will implement the PM Strategy and provide annual reports to the SCE.
Ongoing
2. Communication and Engagement (Ethics Action Plan) Sept 2014, CIHR SKTE Branch Advise on CIHR's communication strategy for ethics
  • CIHR participates in annual conferences of the Canadian Bioethics Society and the Canadian Association of Research Ethics Boards.
  • CIHR issues regular communiqués to the ethics community on ethics at CIHR.
  • CIHR plans to increase the social media and web presence for ethics at CIHR.
Ongoing
3. Integration of Ethics (Ethics Action Plan) Sept 2014, CIHR SKTE Branch How to optimize the integration of ethics within CIHR (includes building research capacity in ethics, and education in ethics)
  • CIHR conducted an analysis of applicant use of "ethics considerations" requirements in selected targeted funding opportunities; and an international scan of how other funders stimulate researchers' thinking about ethics.
  • CIHR provides updates to SCE on CIHR’s strategies to integrate ethics, for review.
  • Ethics Office to continue its Ethics Education project, with advice from the SCE.
Ongoing
4. Global Alliance for Genomics and Health (GA4GH) Sept 2014, CIHR President Provide advice on the GA4GH Framework for Responsible Sharing of Genomics and Health-related Data, and related policies, and review against relevant Tri-Council Policies
  • Informed by the SCE, CIHR became a member of GA4GH.
  • CIHR informed the GA4GH of the SCE's recommended changes to the Framework.
  • CIHR informed the other federal granting councils of SCE's recommended additions to Tri-Agency Policies.
Completed
5. Pan-Canadian Clinical Trial on Chronic Cerebrospinal Venous Insufficiency Procedure for Multiple Sclerosis Sept 2014, CIHR President Provide advice on the ethics of continuing or stopping the CIHR-co-funded study
  • CIHR was advised that there is not sufficient justification to discontinue the study at this time.
  • CIHR informed the Study Principal Investigators of the SCE’s advice with respect to ensuring disclosures of possible risks to research participants are up-to-date.
Completed
6. Patient and Citizen Engagement September 2014, CIHR Priority-Driven Research Branch Provide feedback on SPOR’s Patient Engagement Framework and CIHR's Patient and Citizen Engagement Implementation Strategy, and associated tools; and an Ethics Office proposal to develop ethics guidance
  • With SCE endorsement and collaboration, CIHR to set up a Working Group to develop ethics guidance on the engagement of patients in research.
In development
7. Partnerships with the private sector in Pathways to Health Equity for Aboriginal Peoples Signature Initiative, and the CIHR-wide Partnership Strategy January 2015, CIHR-Institute of Population and Public Health and the CIHR Partnerships and Business Development Branch Provide advice on 1) refining the partnership benefit-risk assessment approaches for the Pathways initiative, and 2) identifying key ethical considerations when developing a CIHR-wide partnership strategy
  • CIHR will present new benefit risk assessment and partner eligibility guidelines to SCE (this is included in the Crowdfunding/Partnership action plan).
Ongoing
8. The role of SCE in the Canadian ethics landscape January 2015, SCE SCE identified lack of a national ethics committee in Canada, and question of scope of SCE's mandate
  • CIHR conducted an international scan of ethics committees for SCE discussion.
  • On a standing basis, CIHR invites the lead on bioethics at Health Canada to SCE meetings as an observer.
  • CIHR invites speakers from other health portfolio and research funding bodies to SCE meetings to facilitate information exchange and potential future collaboration.
Ongoing
9. Ethics and Disruptive Technologies May 2015, CIHR- Institute of Infection and Immunity and the SKTE Branch Provide advice on ethics considerations in disruptive technologies
  • CIHR conducted an internal scan of ethics issues and other funders' activities.
  • CIHR developed and is implementing a Disruptive Technology action plan, endorsed by the SCE.
Ongoing
10. Electronic Consent May 2015, SCE Member To consider whether to bring the issue of electronic consent to the Panel on Research Ethics as an alternate means to document consent.
  • Through the Tri-Agency Secretariat on Responsible Conduct of Research, the Interagency Panel on Research Ethics was informed of SCE's comments on electronic consent, for consideration.
Completed
11. Human Germline Gene Editing Sept 2015, CIHR Chief Scientific Officer To advise on CIHR’s role
  • CIHR will collaborate with the SCE on the drafting of a “Points to Consider” document” to inform Governing Council, Science Council and Health Canada.
In development
12. Crowdfunding research Sept 2015, CIHR Institute of Nutrition, Metabolism and Diabetes and the CIHR Institute of Population and Public Health Provide advice on whether CIHR should permit or promote crowdfunding of research
  • CIHR developed and is implementing a Crowdfunding/ Partnership Action Plan, endorsed by the SCE.
Ongoing
13. CIHR Strategic Action Plan on Training Sept 2015, CIHR SKTE Branch Provide feedback on CIHR's draft Strategic Action Plan on Training
  • CIHR will convene a small brainstorming group to discuss how CIHR could collaborate with the Canadian Bioethics Society on an assessment of ethics training and career paths in ethics.
Not yet initiated
14. Global Health Sept 2015, External SCE member and CIHR Ethics Office Provide feedback on the Canadian Coalition for Global Health Research's (CCGHR) Draft Principles for Canadians Involved in Global Health Research.
  • CIHR Ethics Office communicated the SCE feedback to CCGHR.
Completed
15. CIHR Health-related and Health Research Data Framework March 2015, CIHR SKTE Branch Feedback on the integration of ethics in the Data Framework's objectives and proposed action plan.
  • CIHR incorporated SCE feedback into the draft Data Framework.
Completed
16. Ethical Challenges arising from Innovative Methods for Clinical Trials Jan 2015, CIHR Institute of Circulatory and Respiratory Health and the SKTE Branch Have representation on an Advisory Group to be set up by CIHR to commission a white paper on innovative clinical trial methodology and guidance CIHR decided not to pursue this issue because of overlap with work underway by others in Canada.  

Appendix 2: Ethics-related Grants and Awards Validation Exercise

Data set: There are 8201 grants and awards (G & A) that actively received funds in the 2015- 2016 fiscal year. This includes G & A for which funding started prior to 2015-2016 and continued, or funding started in 2015-2016.All validation processes involved review of G & A titles, investigator-provided keywords, and Abstracts (if submitted).Foundation grants did not have Abstracts, and therefore grant Summaries (if submitted) were reviewed.

Definition of scope and categories: As described in section 4.1, the scope of G & A data collection was expanded to include G & A that relate directly to ethics, or indirectly to ethics (i.e., law and a subset of socio-cultural dimensions of health).Operational definitions of these categories were endorsed by the SCE, and are presented in Appendix 3.

Step 1: Initial development of inclusion/exclusion criteria for the "Socio-Cultural" (S-C) category

Ethics office staff extracted 202 G & A using a few keywords describing the socio-cultural bucket presented to SCE. Ethics Office staff came to a common understanding on an initial set of S-C inclusion/exclusion criteria.

Step 2: Further refinement of the S-C inclusion/exclusion criteria.

Using a 5% sample, Ethics Office staff reviewed the same 410 G & A for ethics primary and non-primary, law and socio-cultural focus; and discussed any differences in scoring.An interrater agreement of 95% was reached.  Based on consensus, the S-C inclusion/exclusion criteria were further refined for Step 3.

Step 3: Validation of the remaining dataset, and further refinement of the Ethics-Primary and S-C inclusion/exclusion criteria.  

After the validation exercise in Step 2, three Ethics Office staff validated the remaining 7791 G & A over a 2-3 week period.Validators scored: yes or no for "Ethics-primary focus", "Ethics-non-primary focus", and "Law" G & A; and indicated the particular inclusion criteria for any S-C G & A. Validators also indicated where they were unsure, and all of these G & A were discussed and scored by consensus.In discussion, inclusion criteria for the Ethics-Primary focus G & A and for the S-C category were refined.

Step 4: Analysis of the validated "Ethics" dataset

The Data & Statistics section of the Performance & Accountability Branch is responsible for doing the main analysis of the validated dataset.The Team Lead was sent the validated dataset with instructions on the analysis required as per the PM Strategy indicators.

Step 5: Sub-analyses

The Ethics office conducted sub-analyses after receiving the main analyses.

Step 6: Development of a keyword-based methodology

In subsequent years, the Ethics Office will develop a keyword methodology, using the validated 2015-2016 dataset, to report on indicators requiring the validation of large datasets of G & A (e.g., success rates in competitions) in order to make the workload manageable.To eliminate false positives, manual validation based on the operational definitions presented in Appendix 3 will continue to be an essential step of the validation process.

Additional Notes on the Validation Process:

Double-counting: Double-counting of G & A in more than one category was minimized as much as possible, although it was technically possible for projects to fit into the category of Ethics Non-Primary Focus, as well as Law-Primary Focus or Socio-Cultural-Primary Focus. In the 2015-2016 dataset, there were only three G & A that were double-counted due to being validated as both Ethics Non-Primary Focus and Socio-Cultural Primary Focus.

Unknowns: Of the 8201 G & A that actively received funds in 2015-2016, G & A were validated as being relevant to ethics or not.In addition, 1192 G & A had no Abstract or Summary available to the validators, and therefore could not be assessed.These G & A were therefore marked as "Unknown" and were not included in the validated dataset.Exceptions to this rule were made only if the G & A title explicitly indicated a central focus on ethics. The vast majority of "Unknown" projects were CIHR-funded Canada Research Chair Awards.

Appendix 3: Operational Definitions for Ethics-related Grants and Awards

1) Ethics as a Primary Focus and 2) Ethics as a Non-Primary Focus

Ethics-Operational definition:
The grant/award incorporates ethics as it applies to health (including health research, health promotion and maintenance, clinical care, population and public health, health systems and services, policy and governance). Relevant grants/awards are framed around, and expand upon, ethical principles, concepts or issues. Grants/awards may have ethics as a primary or non-primary focus. Both types will be captured, but will be reported separately.

Additional Inclusion criteria for Ethics as a Primary Focus:

  • Ethics—either explicit use of the word “ethics/ethical” or of an ethics concept such as “informed consent”, “research integrity”, “conflict of interest”, “moral distress”—is the driver and central focus of the grant/award, even where there are other aspects to the grant/award (e.g., policy development).
  • The grant/award has no abstract but the title clearly highlights a central focus on ethics.
  • Grants funded through the Catalyst Grants-Ethics program.

3) Law as a Primary Focus

Law-Operational definition:
The grant/award explores law-related aspects of health and health research as a primary focus beyond compliance with existing legal frameworks. Grants/awards may or may not have an explicit ethical dimension to the project.

4) Socio-Cultural Factors related to Ethics as a Primary Focus:

Socio-Cultural Operational definition:
The grant/award explores social and cultural dimensions of health and health research as a primary focus. These grants/awards may or may not explicitly reference ethics or involve ethics researchers. Projects explore concepts related to ethics such as:

  • cultural appropriateness and norms;
  • vulnerability, marginalization and stigmatization;
  • loss or devaluation of language and culture;
  • access to culturally appropriate materials and services;
  • equity/inequity.

Additional Inclusion Criteria:
1. A primary focus on:

  1. exploring (and developing) theories or frameworks of ethics-related concepts and principles
  2. exploring Aboriginal cultural ceremonies
  3. involving loss or devaluation of language and culture
  4. engaging stakeholders to elicit information on cultural appropriateness and norms (including gender norms and identities) -- e.g., in the design or development of an intervention. Exclude projects focused on implementation of an intervention- see 2b.
  5. engaging groups/individuals in vulnerable circumstances to find out what interventions, research priorities, etc., are appropriate for them
  6. exploring the causes (e.g., barriers) or consequences (e.g., impacts) of circumstances of vulnerability, marginalization or stigmatization on groups or individuals
  7. designing an intervention focused around ethics-related concepts (e.g., weight bias/stigmatization)
  8. implementing training focused on ethics-related concepts (e.g., culturally appropriate research methods/skills, cultural norms, vulnerability)

Exclusion Criteria:
2. A primary focus on:

  1. exploring causes of disease (including psychological conditions)
  2. implementing an intervention (e.g., health care delivery, training, education, networking) or disseminating the results of an intervention, even if targeted to persons or groups in circumstances of vulnerability. Training focused on ethics-related concepts falls under 1h and should be included.
  3. evaluating an intervention/program, even if the evaluation involves exploring the experiences and views of persons or groups in circumstances of vulnerability with regard to the intervention, unless the evaluation is directly informing a (re-)design of the intervention (see 1d).
  4. exploring a phenomenon/cause/event itself (e.g., climate change) , with a non-primary focus on the impact on, or experiences of, groups or persons in circumstances of vulnerability
  5. “vulnerability” as “risk of disease”, “risk of adverse effects of disease”, or “risk of unhealthy behaviours”
  6. engaging stakeholders, unless focused on 1d (cultural appropriateness/norms) or 1e (appropriateness for those in vulnerable circumstances)

Appendix 4: Detailed Results for Ethics-related Grants and Awards by Program

A4.1 Ethics-related Grants and Awards Actively Funded in 2015–2016 (New and Continuing)

A4.1a Ethics as a Primary Focus

Figure 4. Ethics as a Primary Focus: CIHR Expenditures (in Thousands) for New and Continuing Grants and Awards in 2015–2016, by Program Type.

Figure 4 long description
Investigator-Initiated Priority-Driven
Research $266,274 $1,359,767
Training And Career Support $329,500 $141,250
Panel On Research Ethics   $88,600
Canadian Council On Animal Care   $1,400,000

Erratum: An error was corrected in the reported expenditures for the “Training and Career Support” category in Figure 4. Table 1 presents the correct data and remains unchanged.

Figure 5. Ethics as a Primary Focus: Number of New and Continuing Grants and Awards in 2015–2016, by Program Type.

Figure 5 long description
Investigator-Initiated Priority-Driven
Research 2 14
Training And Career Support 14 6
Panel On Research Ethics   12
Canadian Council On Animal Care   1
Table 1. Ethics as a Primary Focus: Number of New and Continuing Grants and Awards, and Expenditures, in 2015–2016, by Program Name.
Programs # $ % of $
Investigator-Initiated 16 $595,774 16.62%
Research 2 $266,274 7.43%
Operating Grant 2 $266,274 7.43%
Training and Career Support 14 $329,500 9.19%
Canada Graduate Scholarships – Michael Smith Foreign Study Supplements 2 $12,000 0.33%
CIHR Fellowship 6 $157,500 4.39%
Doctoral Award - Doctoral Foreign Study Award (DFSA) 1 $10,000 0.28%
Doctoral Award - Frederick Banting and Charles Best Canada Graduate Scholarships 4 $116,667 3.25%
Doctoral: Vanier Canada Graduate Scholarships 1 $33,333 0.93%
Priority-Driven 33 $2,989,617 83.38%
Research 14 $1,359,767 37.92%
Catalyst Grant: Ethics 8 $680,868 18.99%
Catalyst Grant: HIV/AIDS Community-Based Research Program - General Stream 1 $32,715 0.91%
Operating Grant – Priority Announcement: HIV/AIDS Research Initiative - Health System/Population Health Stream 1 $76,439 2.13%
Operating Grant - Priority Announcement: Ethics 2 $209,545 5.84%
Operating Grant: Programmatic Grants to tackle health and health equity 1 $347,700 9.70%
Team Grant: European Research Projects of Neuroscience 1 $12,500 0.35%
Training and Career Support 6 $141,250 3.93%
Doctoral Research Award – Priority Announcement: Evidence Informed Healthcare Renewal 1 $2,500 0.07%
Doctoral Research Award - Priority Announcement: Research in First Nations, Métis &/or Inuit Health 1 $48,500 1.35%
Fellowship - Priority Announcement: Health Services/Population Health HIV/AIDS Research 1 $8,333 0.23%
Fellowship - Priority Announcement: Regional Partnership Program - Newfoundland & Labrador 1 $18,750 0.52%
Fellowship - Priority Announcement: Knowledge Translation 1 $61,667 1.72%
Travel Awards - Institute Community Support 1 $1,500 0.04%
Panel on Research Ethics 12 $88,600 2.47%
Canadian Council on Animal Care 1 $1,400,000 39.05%
Grand Total 49 $3,585,391 100.00%

A4.1b Ethics as a Non-Primary Focus

Figure 6. Ethics as a Non-Primary Focus: Number of New and Continuing Grants and Awards in 2015–2016, by Program Type.

Figure 6 long description
Investigator-Initiated Priority-Driven
Research 7 2
Training And Career Support 5 5

Note: Expenditures for “Ethics as a Non-Primary Focus” cannot be reported because there are no data on the amount of grant/award budgets allocated to ethics components.

Table 2. Ethics as a Non-Primary Focus: Number of New and Continuing Grants and Awards in 2015–2016 by Program Name.
Programs #

*: Two of these operating grants were also counted in the Socio-Cultural category (Table 4).
**: This grant is also counted in the Socio-Cultural category (Table 4).

Note: Expenditures for “Ethics as a Non-Primary Focus” cannot be reported because there are no data on the amount of grant/award budgets allocated to ethics components.

Investigator-Initiated 12
Research 7
Foundation Grant 2
Operating Grant* 5
Training and Career Support 5
CIHR New Investigator 1
Doctoral Award: Frederick Banting and Charles Best Canada Graduate Scholarships 3
Master's Award: Frederick Banting and Charles Best Canada Graduate Scholarships 1
Priority-Driven 7
Research 2
Team Grant : Environments and Health - LOI - IWK/TEK/TES** 1
Team Grant: HIV/AIDS Vaccine Discovery and Social Research 1
Training and Career Support 5
Doctoral Award - Frederick Banting and Charles Best Canada Graduate Scholarships 2
Fellowship - Priority Announcement: Orphan Drug Policy 1
Travel Awards - Institute Community Support 2
Grand Total 19

A4.1c Law as a Primary Focus

Figure 7. Law as a Primary Focus: CIHR Expenditures (in Thousands) by Program Type in 2015–2016.

Figure 7 long description
Investigator-Initiated Priority-Driven
Research $169,008 $149,967
Training And Career Support $145,000 $87,959
Planning And Dissemination $10,000

Figure 8. Law as a Primary Focus: Number of New and Continuing Grants and Awards by Program Type in 2015–2016.

Figure 8 long description
Investigator-Initiated Priority-Driven
Research 2 1
Training And Career Support 3 4
Planning And Dissemination 1
Table 3. Law as a Primary Focus: Number of New and Continuing Grants and Awards, and Expenditures, in 2015–2016, by Program Name.
Programs # $ % of $
Investigator-Initiated 5 $314,008 55.88%
Research 2 $169,008 30.08%
Operating Grant 2 $169,008 30.08%
Training and Career Support 3 $145,000 25.81%
CIHR Fellowship 1 $45,000 8.01%
Doctoral: Vanier Canada Graduate Scholarships 2 $100,000 17.80%
Priority-Driven 6 $247,926 44.12%
Research 1 $149,967 26.69%
Operating Grant - HIV/AIDS CBR Program - General 1 $149,967 26.69%
Training and Career Support 4 $87,959 15.65%
Doctoral Research Award: HIV/AIDS Community-Based Research Program - Aboriginal Stream 1 $37,500 6.67%
Doctoral Research Award: HIV/AIDS Community-Based Research Program - General Stream 1 $41,667 7.41%
Master's Award - HIV/AIDS Community-Based Research: General Stream 1 $7,292 1.30%
Travel Awards - Institute Community Support 1 $1,500 0.27%
Planning and Dissemination Grant 1 $10,000 1.78%
Planning and Dissemination Grant – Institute Community Support 1 $10,000 1.78%
Grand Total 11 $561,934 100.00%

A4.1d Socio-Cultural Factors related to Ethics as a Primary Focus

Figure 9. Socio-Cultural Factors related to Ethics as a Primary Focus: CIHR Expenditures (in Thousands) for New and Continuing Grants and Award in 2015–2016, by Program Type.

Figure 9 long description
Investigator-Initiated Priority-Driven
Research $7,652,081 $5,231,275
Training And Career Support $2,109,999 $952,173
Planning And Dissemination $186,683
Patient Engagement $35,000

Figure 10. Socio-Cultural Factors related to Ethics as a Primary Focus: Number of New and Continuing Grants and Awards in 2015–2016. by Program Type.

Figure 10 long description
Investigator-Initiated Priority-Driven
Research 53 45
Training And Career Support 55 55
Planning And Dissemination 17
Patient Engagement 3
Table 4. Socio-cultural factors related to Ethics as a Primary Focus: Number of New and Continuing Grants and Awards, and Expenditures, in 2015–2016, by Program Name.
Programs # $ % of $

*: Two of these operating grants were also counted in the Ethics as a Non-Primary Focus category (Table 2).
**: This grant is also counted in the Ethics as a Non-Primary Focus category (Table 2).

Investigator-Initiated 108 $9,762,080 60.38%
Research 53 $7,652,081 47.34%
Foundation Grant 1 $1,078,088 6.67%
Operating Grant* 50 $6,321,477 39.10%
Operating Grant: Knowledge to Action 1 $117,255 0.73%
Partnerships for Health System Improvement 1 $135,261 0.84%
Training and Career Support 55 $2,109,999 13.05%
Banting Postdoctoral Fellowship Program 1 $140,000 0.87%
CIHR Fellowship 9 $329,999 2.04%
CIHR New Investigator 8 $420,000 2.60%
Doctoral Award - Doctoral Foreign Study Award 1 $27,500 0.17%
Doctoral Award - Frederick Banting and Charles Best Canada Graduate Scholarships 16 $495,000 3.06%
Doctoral: Vanier Canada Graduate Scholarships 9 $450,000 2.78%
Master's Award: Frederick Banting and Charles Best Canada Graduate Scholarships 9 $157,500 0.97%
New Investigator Salary Award - Priority Announcement: Knowledge Translation 1 $60,000 0.37%
Peter Lougheed/CIHR New Investigator Canada's Premier Young Researcher 1 $30,000 0.19%
Priority-Driven 120 $6,405,131 39.62%
Research 45 $5,231,275 32.37%
CANADA-HOPE Scholarship Program - Operating Grant 2 $2,709 0.02%
Catalyst Grant: HIV/AIDS Community-Based Research Program - General Stream 2 $66,000 0.41%
Catalyst Grant: HIV/AIDS Community Based Research Program - Aboriginal Stream 4 $131,663 0.81%
Collaborative Health Research Projects (NSERC partnered) 1 $55,500 0.34%
Emerging Team Grant: Alliances in Mobility in Aging - full application 2 $500,000 3.09%
HIV Implementation Science – Component 1 1 $150,000 0.93%
Operating Grant - Priority Announcement: Applying the "Two-eyed Seeing" model to Aboriginal Health 3 $400,000 2.47%
Operating Grant - HIV/AIDS Community-Based Research Program - Aboriginal 3 $396,466 2.45%
Operating Grant - HIV/AIDS Community-Based Research Program - General 4 $581,951 3.60%
Operating Grant - Priority Announcement: Aboriginal Ways of Knowing and Two-eyed Seeing (Bridge) 3 $300,000 1.86%
Operating Grant - Priority Announcement: Canadian HIV Vaccine Initiative Vaccine Discovery and Social Research 1 $127,218 0.79%
Operating Grant - Priority Announcement: Regional Partnership Program - Nova Scotia 1 $17,429 0.11%
Operating Grant - Priority Announcement: Regional Partnership Program - Saskatchewan 1 $2,450 0.02%
Operating Grant - Priority Announcement: Regional Partnership Program : Manitoba 1 $17,263 0.11%
Operating Grant - Priority Announcement: Aboriginal Ways of Knowing 2 $301,521 1.87%
Operating Grant: Autism Spectrum Disorders Treatment and Care Research 1 $40,000 0.25%
Operating Grant: Cancer Prevention Research Grants 1 $149,974 0.93%
Operating Grant: Health, Wellbeing & Extended Working Life 1 $31,250 0.19%
Operating Grant: Population Health Intervention Research 2 $257,007 1.59%
Operating Grant: Programmatic Grants to tackle health and health equity 1 $400,000 2.47%
Operating Grant: SPOR PIHCI Network: Quick Strikes 1 $95,000 0.59%
Team Grant: Environments and Health – Letter of Intent (LOI) - Indigenous Ways of Knowing (IWK) / Traditional Ecological Knowledge (TEK) / Two-Eyed Seeing (TES) Nexus Areas * 1 $49,789 0.31%
Team Grant: Environments and Health – Letter of Intent (LOI) - Resource development 1 $50,000 0.31%
Team Grant: Community-Based Primary Healthcare - Full Application 1 $439,756 2.72%
Team Grant: Community-Based Primary Healthcare – Institute of Aboriginal Peoples Health (IAPH) 1 $500,000 3.09%
Team Grant: Pathways Implementation Research Team – Component 2 3 $168,329 1.04%
Training and Career Support 55 $952,173 5.89%
Doctoral Research Award - Priority Announcement: Aboriginal Research Methodologies 6 $191,500 1.18%
Doctoral Research Award - Priority Announcement: Health Services/Population Health HIV/AIDS Research 2 $68,500 0.42%
Doctoral Research Award - Priority Announcement: IAPH Quantitative Research 1 $38,500 0.24%
Doctoral Research Award - Priority Announcement: Regional Partnerships Program - Saskatchewan 1 $17,500 0.11%
Doctoral Research Award - Priority Announcement: Patient-Oriented Research 1 $30,000 0.19%
Doctoral Research Award - Priority Announcement: Research in First Nations, Métis &/or Inuit Health 3 $94,500 0.58%
Doctoral Research Award: HIV/AIDS CBR Program - General Stream 1 $2,500 0.02%
Fellowship - PA: Health Services/Population Health HIV/AIDS Research 3 $89,167 0.55%
Fellowship - PA: Mixed Methods Approach in Aboriginal Research 1 $30,000 0.19%
Fellowship - PA: Research in First Nations, Métis and/or Inuit Health 1 $23,334 0.14%
Fellowship - Priority Announcement: Aboriginal Research Methodologies 1 $45,583 0.28%
Fellowship - Priority Announcement: IAPH Quantitative Research 2 $48,334 0.30%
New Investigator Award - PA: HIV/AIDS Services/Population Health Research 2 $135,000 0.84%
New Investigator Salary Award – Priority Announcement: Knowledge Translation 1 $45,000 0.28%
Prize – Institute of Human Development Child and Youth Health  (IHDCYH) Talks 1 $750 0.00%
Training Grant: Indigenous Mentorship Network Program – Letter of Intent (LOI) 2 $49,497 0.31%
Travel Awards - Institute Community Support 26 $42,508 0.26%
Planning and Dissemination 17 $186,683 1.16%
Commonwealth Fund Dissemination Award 2015–2016 1 $2,500 0.02%
Planning and Dissemination Grant– Institute Community Support 16 $184,183 1.14%
Patient Engagement 3 $35,000 0.22%
Patient Engagement – Collaboration Grants 3 $35,000 0.22%
Grand Total 228 $16,167,211 100.00%

A4.2 New Ethics-related Grants and Awards in 2015–2016

A4.2a Ethics as a Primary Focus

Figure 11. Ethics as a Primary Focus: Expenditures (in Thousands) for New Grants and Awards in 2015–2016, by Program Type.

Figure 11 long description
Investigator-Initiated Priority-Driven
Research $100,000 $443,986
Training And Career Support $84,500 $1,500
Panel On Research Ethics   $88,600

Figure 12. Ethics as a Primary Focus: Number of New Grants and Awards in 2015–2016, by Program Type.

Figure 12 long description
Investigator-Initiated Priority-Driven
Research 1 6
Training And Career Support 5 1
Panel On Research Ethics   12
Table 5. Ethics as a Primary Focus: Number of New Grants and Awards, and Expenditures, in 2015–2016, by Program Name.
Programs # $ % of $
Investigator-Initiated 6 $184,500 25.68%
Research 1 $100,000 13.92%
Operating Grant 1 $100,000 13.92%
Training and Career Support 5 $84,500 11.76%
Canada Graduate Scholarships – Michael Smith Foreign Study Supplements 2 $12,000 1.67%
CIHR Fellowship 2 $37,500 5.22%
Doctoral Award - Frederick Banting and Charles Best Canada Graduate Scholarships 1 $35,000 4.87%
Priority-Driven 19 $534,086 74.32%
Research 6 $443,986 61.79%
Catalyst Grant: Ethics 4 $398,771 55.49%
Catalyst Grant: HIV/AIDS CBR Program - General Stream 1 $32,715 4.55%
Team Grant: European Research Projects of Neuroscience 1 $12,500 1.74%
Training and Career Support 1 $1,500 0.21%
Travel Awards - Institute Community Support 1 $1,500 0.21%
Panel on Research Ethics 12 $88,600 12.33%
Grand Total 25 $718,586 100.00%

A4.1b Ethics as a Non-Primary Focus

Figure 13. Ethics as a Non-Primary Focus: Number of New Grants and Awards in 2015–2016, by Program Type.

Figure 13 long description
Investigator-Initiated Priority-Driven
Research 3 1
Training And Career Support 3 2

Note: Expenditures for “Ethics as a Non-Primary Focus” cannot be reported because there are no data on the amount of grant/award budgets allocated to ethics components.

Table 6. Ethics as a Non-Primary Focus: Number of New Grants and Awards in 2015–2016, by Program Name.
Programs #

*: This grant is also counted in the Socio-Cultural category (Table 8).

Note: Expenditures for “Ethics as a Non-Primary Focus” cannot be reported because there are no data on the amount of grant/award budgets allocated to ethics components.

Investigator-Initiated 6
Research 3
Foundation Grant 2
Operating Grant* 1
Training and Career Support 3
CIHR New Investigator 1
Doctoral Award: Frederick Banting and Charles Best Canada Graduate Scholarships 1
Master's Award: Frederick Banting and Charles Best Canada Graduate Scholarships 1
Priority-Driven 3
Research 1
Team Grant: Environments and Health - LOI - IWK/TEK/TES* 1
Training and Career Support 2
Travel Awards - Institute Community Support 2
Grand Total 9

A4.1c Law as a Primary Focus

Figure 14. Law as a Primary Focus: Expenditures (in Thousands) for New Grants and Awards in 2015–2016, by Program Type

Figure 14 long description
Investigator-Initiated Priority-Driven
Research $88,496 $149,967
Training And Career Support $1,500
Planning And Dissemination $10,000

Figure 15. Law as a Primary Focus: Number of New Grants and Awards in 2015–2016, by Program Type.

Figure 15 long description
Investigator-Initiated Priority-Driven
Research 1 1
Training And Career Support 1
Planning And Dissemination 1
Table 7. Law as a Primary Focus: Number of New Grants and Awards, and Expenditures, in 2015–2016, by Program Name.
Programs # $ % of $
Investigator-Initiated 1 $88,496 35.40%
Research 1 $88,496 35.40%
Operating Grant 1 $88,496 35.40%
Priority-Driven 3 $161,467 64.60%
Research 1 $149,967 60.00%
Operating Grant - HIV/AIDS CBR Program - General 1 $149,967 60.00%
Training and Career Support 1 $1,500 0.60%
Travel Awards - Institute Community Support 1 $1,500 0.60%
Planning and Dissemination 1 $10,000 4.00%
Planning and Dissemination Grant – Institute Community Support 1 $10,000 4.00%
Grand Total 4 $249,963 100.00%

4.1d Socio-Cultural Factors related to Ethics as a Primary Focus

Figure 16. Socio-Cultural Factors related to Ethics as a Primary Focus: Expenditures (in Thousands) for New Grants and Awards in 2015–2016, by Program Type.

Figure 16 long description
Investigator-Initiated Priority-Driven
Research $2,374,903 $1,449,012
Training And Career Support $661,666 $193,255
Planning And Dissemination $186,683
Patient Engagement $35,000

Figure 17. Socio-Cultural Factors related to Ethics as a Primary Focus: Number of New Grants and Awards in 2015–2016, by Program Type.

Figure 17 long description
Investigator-Initiated Priority-Driven
Research 13 20
Training And Career Support 21 32
Planning And Dissemination 17
Patient Engagement 3
Table 8. Socio-Cultural Factors Related to Ethics as a Primary Focus: Number of New Grants and Awards, and Expenditures, in 2015–2016, by Program Name.
Programs # $ % of $

*One of these grants was also counted in the Ethics Non-Primary Focus category (Table 6).
**This grant is also counted in the Ethics Non-Primary Focus category (Table 6).

Investigator-Initiated 34 $3,036,569 61.96%
Research 13 $2,374,903 48.46%
Foundation Grant 1 $1,078,088 22.00%
Operating Grant* 12 $1,296,815 26.46%
Training and Career Support 21 $661,666 13.50%
Banting Postdoctoral Fellowship Program 1 $140,000 2.86%
CIHR Fellowship 2 $76,666 1.56%
CIHR New Investigator 1 $5,000 0.10%
Doctoral Award - Doctoral Foreign Study Award (DFSA) 1 $27,500 0.56%
Doctoral Award - Frederick Banting and Charles Best Canada Graduate Scholarships 5 $155,000 3.16%
Doctoral: Vanier Canada Graduate Scholarships 2 $100,000 2.04%
Master's Award: Frederick Banting and Charles Best Canada Graduate Scholarships 9 $157,500 3.21%
Priority-Driven 72 $1,863,950 38.04%
Research 20 $1,449,012 29.57%
HIV Implementation Science – Component 1 1 $150,000 3.06%
Operating Grant - HIV/AIDS CBR Program - Aboriginal 4 $131,663 2.69%
Operating Grant - HIV/AIDS CBR Program - General 2 $66,000 1.35%
Operating Grant - Priority Announcement: Aboriginal Ways of Knowing and Two-eyed Seeing (Bridge) 3 $300,000 6.12%
Operating Grant: Cancer Prevention Research Grants 1 $149,974 3.06%
Operating Grant: Health, Wellbeing & Extended Working Life 1 $31,250 0.64%
Operating Grant: Population Health Intervention Research 2 $257,007 5.24%
Operating Grant: SPOR PIHCI Network: Quick Strikes 1 $95,000 1.94%
Team Grant: Environments and Health - LOI - IWK/TEK/TES** 1 $49,789 1.02%
Team Grant: Environments and Health - LOI - Resource development 1 $50,000 1.02%
Team Grant: Pathways Implementation Research Team – Component 2 3 $168,329 3.43%
Training and Career Support 32 $193,255 3.94%
Doctoral Research Award - Priority Announcement: Aboriginal Research Methodologies 1 $33,500 0.68%
Doctoral Research Award - Priority Announcement: Research in First Nations, Métis &/or Inuit Health 2 $67,000 1.37%
Prize - IHDCYH Talks 1 $750 0.00%
Training Grant: Indigenous Mentorship Network Program - LOI 2 $49,497 1.01%
Travel Awards - Institute Community Support 26 $42,508 0.87%
Planning and Dissemination 17 $186,683 3.81%
Commonwealth Fund Dissemination Award 2015–2016 1 $2,500 0.05%
Planning and Dissemination Grant– Institute Community Support 16 $184,183 1.14%
Patient Engagement 3 $35,000 0.71%
Patient Engagement – Collaboration Grants 3 $35,000 0.71%
Grand Total 106 $4,900,519 100.00%

Appendix 5: Details on Indicators for which Data will be Available in Future

Outcome Indicators Reason not available in 2015–2016 Responsibility and expected timeline for initial reporting
1) Building Capacity: Strengthened and expanded national ethics knowledge basea) Number of ethics researchers funded vs CIHR and by programThese measures seek to examine all CIHR funding opportunities, not just those opportunities targeting ethics. As a result, a keyword methodology must be developed, tested and validated. The keyword method is being developed to identify:
  • researchers
  • applications and
  • reviewers
relevant to the categories of “ethics”, “law” and “socio- cultural factors related to ethics”. Resource constraints required that the Ethics team focus on what could be done given the timelines and so this methodology was placed in the 2016–2017 fiscal year for completion.
Ethics Office
Expected to be able to report on 2015–2016 data in 2016–2017
2) Building Capacity: Strengthened ethics research community in Canada a) Percentage of ethics applications overall (success rates)
b) Number of grants sent to ethics reviewers (workload / burden / capacity)
c) Number of applications ethics reviewers have received
d) Number of ethics reviewers who were deployed to review an application
Once we have a list of “ethics” reviewers (developed using a keyword methodology- see above), we can collect these data. The keyword approach will help us identify who these individuals are, beyond the holders of grants designated as ethics grants. Ethics Office, in collaboration with the College of Reviewers with respect to reviewer-related data 2016–2017
e) Number of ethics reviewers recruited in the College of Reviewers Recruitment of reviewers into the College is upcoming. Ethics Office, in liaison with the College of Reviewers Branch 2017–2018
f) Percentage of targeted funding opportunities with an ethics component that lead to ethics researchers being funded as principal investigators or co-investigatorsFunding release dates for funding opportunities launched in 2015–2016 are spread across 2015–2016 and 2016–2017, so a full picture of ethics researchers funded through relevant targeted funding opportunities is not yet available. Also, a method to identify ethics researchers is being developed.Ethics OfficeFull results on 2015–2016 data available in 2016–2017
3) Advancing Knowledge: Strengthened and expanded national ethics knowledge basea) Percentage of ethics grants reporting new method, new theory or replication of findingsEnd-of-grant reports (RRS) are due from grant/award recipients within 18 months of the end of the funding period, and are not yet available for the validated grants and awards in 2015–2016. Previous years of “ethics” grants and award were not validated using our current methodology, so RRS reports from those grants cannot be used.Performance and Accountability Branch, in collaboration with the Ethics Office 2017–2018 (partial data on 2015–2016 grants/awards).
b) Number of publications in ethics from CIHR-funded researchers
c) Citations of findings of ethics research in scientific and non-scientific publications
Once the keyword methodology is finalized, bibliometric analysis can be undertaken.Performance and Accountability Branch in collaboration with the Ethics Office 2017–2018
4) Informing decision-making: Ethics research that informs decision-making and practices in health and health research a) Co-author analysis for ethics researchers being cited on publications
b) Field analysis of citations of ethics research
Once the keyword methodology is finalized, bibliometric analysis can be undertaken. Performance and Accountability Branch, in collaboration with the Ethics Office 2017–2018
c) Percentage of ethics grants reporting contribution to improved health of Canadians
d) Percentage of ethics grants reporting application of findings
e) Percentage of ethics grants reporting contribution to more effective health services and products
End-of-grant reports are due from grant/award recipients within 18 months of the end of the funding period, and are not yet available for the validated grants and awards that were active in 2015–2016. Previous years of “ethics” grants and awards were not validated using our current methodology, so RRS reports from those grants cannot be used.Performance and Accountability Branch, in collaboration with the Ethics Office 2017–2018 (partial data on 2015–2016 grants/awards).
Date modified: