Research Article | | Peer-Reviewed

Research Ethics Governance and Responsible Conduct of Research at the Defence Services Medical Academy, Myanmar: A Documentary Analysis

Received: 9 September 2026     Accepted: 20 September 2026     Published: 29 September 2026
Views:       Downloads:
Abstract

Ethical Review Committees (ERCs) require both formal governance mechanisms and continuing capacity building to support consistent ethical review and responsible research conduct. The Defence Services Medical Academy (DSMA), Myanmar, has maintained institutional standard operating procedures (SOPs) for its Ethical Review Committee and has conducted recurring workshops on responsible conduct of research (RCR). To describe the longitudinal evolution of research ethics governance and RCR capacity building at DSMA using available institutional documentary sources. A retrospective descriptive documentary analysis was undertaken using available DSMA ERC SOPs dated 2017 and 2022, a separate 2022 SOP for principal investigators, the 2024 third-edition SOP, and RCR/research-ethics workshop programmes from 2018, 2022, 2023, 2024 and 2026. Documents were reviewed using predefined domains: governance and committee structure; review procedures; participant protection; informed consent; post-approval oversight; investigator guidance; data and material governance; documentation; and research-ethics capacity building. Changes were interpreted as documentary evidence of formalization, differentiation or expansion; no causal inference regarding research quality or participant outcomes was made. The documentary series demonstrated progressive formalization of ERC governance and expansion of operational guidance. The 2017 SOP already addressed committee functions and composition, vulnerable participants, review procedures, informed consent, expedited review, decision-making, monitoring and archiving. By 2022, the institutional SOP incorporated specific guidance for medical education and genetic research and additional operational forms, while a separate PI-oriented SOP provided investigator-facing guidance and multiple consent templates. The 2024 third edition reorganized the SOP into thematic chapters and expanded guidance for survey, records, qualitative and genetic research; waiver of consent; material transfer; data ownership/transfer/use; conflict-of-interest declaration; annual reporting; and final reporting. In parallel, RCR workshops documented from 2018 through 2026 repeatedly addressed research integrity, informed consent, data ethics, research misconduct and investigator responsibility, frequently using group work and discussion. Available documents indicate an evolution at DSMA from a broad institutional ethics-review framework toward a more differentiated governance system combining committee procedures, investigator guidance, research-specific ethical considerations, post-approval documentation and recurring RCR education. Future evaluation should assess implementation, review performance, investigator competence, protocol quality and outcomes of post-approval oversight.

Published in Higher Education Research (Volume 11, Issue 5)
DOI 10.11648/j.her.20261105.16
Page(s) 189-196
Creative Commons

This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, provided the original work is properly cited.

Copyright

Copyright © The Author(s), 2026. Published by Science Publishing Group

Keywords

Ethical Review Committee, Ethical Review, Standard Operating Procedure, Responsible Conduct of Research, Research Governance, Capacity Building, Documentary Analysis, Myanmar

References
[1] World Health Organization. Standards and operational guidance for ethics review of health-related research with human participants. Geneva: WHO; 2011.
[2] World Health Organization. Research ethics committees: basic concepts for capacity-building. Geneva: WHO; 2009.
[3] Council for International Organizations of Medical Sciences (CIOMS). International Ethical Guidelines for Health-related Research Involving Humans. 4th ed. Geneva: CIOMS; 2016.
[4] Oo ZZ, Wun M, Oo YTN, Mya KS, Silverman HJ. Assessing Research Ethics Committees in Myanmar: Results of a Self-Assessment Tool. Asian Bioethics Review. 2020; 12(1): 37-49.
[5] Defence Services Medical Academy Ethical Review Committee. Standard Operating Procedure. Third Edition. DSMA; 2024.
[6] Defence Services Medical Academy Ethical Review Committee. Standard Operating Procedure. DSMA; 2018.
[7] Bowen GA. Document analysis as a qualitative research method. Qualitative Research Journal. 2009; 9(2): 27-40.
[8] Defence Services Medical Academy Ethical Review Committee. Standard Operating Procedure. DSMA; 2022.
[9] Defence Services Medical Academy Ethical Review Committee. Standard Operating Procedure for Principal Investigators. DSMA; 2022.
[10] Defence Services Medical Academy. RCR and Research Ethics Training Workshop Agenda. 11-12 June 2018.
[11] Defence Services Medical Academy Ethical Review Committee. Workshop on Responsible Conduct of Research (2024). Programme and objectives. 29-30 April 2024.
[12] Defence Services Medical Academy Ethical Review Committee. Workshop on Responsible Conduct of Research (2022). Programme. 8 July 2022.
[13] Defence Services Medical Academy Ethical Review Committee. Workshop on Responsible Conduct of Research (2023). Programme. 7 August 2023.
[14] Defence Services Medical Academy Ethical Review Committee. Workshop on Responsible Conduct of Research (2026). Programme. 19-20 March 2026.
[15] World Medical Association. World Medical Association Declaration of Helsinki: Ethical Principles for Medical Research Involving Human Participants. JAMA. 2025; 333(1): 71-74.
Cite This Article
  • APA Style

    Aung, Y. P., Thu, M. Z., Thu, A., Zin, T., Htike, Z. M., et al. (2026). Research Ethics Governance and Responsible Conduct of Research at the Defence Services Medical Academy, Myanmar: A Documentary Analysis. Higher Education Research, 11(5), 189-196. https://doi.org/10.11648/j.her.20261105.16

    Copy | Download

    ACS Style

    Aung, Y. P.; Thu, M. Z.; Thu, A.; Zin, T.; Htike, Z. M., et al. Research Ethics Governance and Responsible Conduct of Research at the Defence Services Medical Academy, Myanmar: A Documentary Analysis. High. Educ. Res. 2026, 11(5), 189-196. doi: 10.11648/j.her.20261105.16

    Copy | Download

    AMA Style

    Aung YP, Thu MZ, Thu A, Zin T, Htike ZM, et al. Research Ethics Governance and Responsible Conduct of Research at the Defence Services Medical Academy, Myanmar: A Documentary Analysis. High Educ Res. 2026;11(5):189-196. doi: 10.11648/j.her.20261105.16

    Copy | Download

  • @article{10.11648/j.her.20261105.16,
      author = {Ye Phyo Aung and Myo Zaw Thu and Aung Thu and Thant Zin and Zin Min Htike and Zaw Myint and Mo Mo Than},
      title = {Research Ethics Governance and Responsible Conduct of Research at the Defence Services Medical Academy, Myanmar: A Documentary Analysis},
      journal = {Higher Education Research},
      volume = {11},
      number = {5},
      pages = {189-196},
      doi = {10.11648/j.her.20261105.16},
      url = {https://doi.org/10.11648/j.her.20261105.16},
      eprint = {https://article.sciencepublishinggroup.com/pdf/10.11648.j.her.20261105.16},
      abstract = {Ethical Review Committees (ERCs) require both formal governance mechanisms and continuing capacity building to support consistent ethical review and responsible research conduct. The Defence Services Medical Academy (DSMA), Myanmar, has maintained institutional standard operating procedures (SOPs) for its Ethical Review Committee and has conducted recurring workshops on responsible conduct of research (RCR). To describe the longitudinal evolution of research ethics governance and RCR capacity building at DSMA using available institutional documentary sources. A retrospective descriptive documentary analysis was undertaken using available DSMA ERC SOPs dated 2017 and 2022, a separate 2022 SOP for principal investigators, the 2024 third-edition SOP, and RCR/research-ethics workshop programmes from 2018, 2022, 2023, 2024 and 2026. Documents were reviewed using predefined domains: governance and committee structure; review procedures; participant protection; informed consent; post-approval oversight; investigator guidance; data and material governance; documentation; and research-ethics capacity building. Changes were interpreted as documentary evidence of formalization, differentiation or expansion; no causal inference regarding research quality or participant outcomes was made. The documentary series demonstrated progressive formalization of ERC governance and expansion of operational guidance. The 2017 SOP already addressed committee functions and composition, vulnerable participants, review procedures, informed consent, expedited review, decision-making, monitoring and archiving. By 2022, the institutional SOP incorporated specific guidance for medical education and genetic research and additional operational forms, while a separate PI-oriented SOP provided investigator-facing guidance and multiple consent templates. The 2024 third edition reorganized the SOP into thematic chapters and expanded guidance for survey, records, qualitative and genetic research; waiver of consent; material transfer; data ownership/transfer/use; conflict-of-interest declaration; annual reporting; and final reporting. In parallel, RCR workshops documented from 2018 through 2026 repeatedly addressed research integrity, informed consent, data ethics, research misconduct and investigator responsibility, frequently using group work and discussion. Available documents indicate an evolution at DSMA from a broad institutional ethics-review framework toward a more differentiated governance system combining committee procedures, investigator guidance, research-specific ethical considerations, post-approval documentation and recurring RCR education. Future evaluation should assess implementation, review performance, investigator competence, protocol quality and outcomes of post-approval oversight.},
     year = {2026}
    }
    

    Copy | Download

  • TY  - JOUR
    T1  - Research Ethics Governance and Responsible Conduct of Research at the Defence Services Medical Academy, Myanmar: A Documentary Analysis
    AU  - Ye Phyo Aung
    AU  - Myo Zaw Thu
    AU  - Aung Thu
    AU  - Thant Zin
    AU  - Zin Min Htike
    AU  - Zaw Myint
    AU  - Mo Mo Than
    Y1  - 2026/09/29
    PY  - 2026
    N1  - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.her.20261105.16
    DO  - 10.11648/j.her.20261105.16
    T2  - Higher Education Research
    JF  - Higher Education Research
    JO  - Higher Education Research
    SP  - 189
    EP  - 196
    PB  - Science Publishing Group
    SN  - 2578-935X
    UR  - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.her.20261105.16
    AB  - Ethical Review Committees (ERCs) require both formal governance mechanisms and continuing capacity building to support consistent ethical review and responsible research conduct. The Defence Services Medical Academy (DSMA), Myanmar, has maintained institutional standard operating procedures (SOPs) for its Ethical Review Committee and has conducted recurring workshops on responsible conduct of research (RCR). To describe the longitudinal evolution of research ethics governance and RCR capacity building at DSMA using available institutional documentary sources. A retrospective descriptive documentary analysis was undertaken using available DSMA ERC SOPs dated 2017 and 2022, a separate 2022 SOP for principal investigators, the 2024 third-edition SOP, and RCR/research-ethics workshop programmes from 2018, 2022, 2023, 2024 and 2026. Documents were reviewed using predefined domains: governance and committee structure; review procedures; participant protection; informed consent; post-approval oversight; investigator guidance; data and material governance; documentation; and research-ethics capacity building. Changes were interpreted as documentary evidence of formalization, differentiation or expansion; no causal inference regarding research quality or participant outcomes was made. The documentary series demonstrated progressive formalization of ERC governance and expansion of operational guidance. The 2017 SOP already addressed committee functions and composition, vulnerable participants, review procedures, informed consent, expedited review, decision-making, monitoring and archiving. By 2022, the institutional SOP incorporated specific guidance for medical education and genetic research and additional operational forms, while a separate PI-oriented SOP provided investigator-facing guidance and multiple consent templates. The 2024 third edition reorganized the SOP into thematic chapters and expanded guidance for survey, records, qualitative and genetic research; waiver of consent; material transfer; data ownership/transfer/use; conflict-of-interest declaration; annual reporting; and final reporting. In parallel, RCR workshops documented from 2018 through 2026 repeatedly addressed research integrity, informed consent, data ethics, research misconduct and investigator responsibility, frequently using group work and discussion. Available documents indicate an evolution at DSMA from a broad institutional ethics-review framework toward a more differentiated governance system combining committee procedures, investigator guidance, research-specific ethical considerations, post-approval documentation and recurring RCR education. Future evaluation should assess implementation, review performance, investigator competence, protocol quality and outcomes of post-approval oversight.
    VL  - 11
    IS  - 5
    ER  - 

    Copy | Download

Author Information
  • Sections