As artificial intelligence, digital technologies, and global research collaborations reshape the way knowledge is created, the landscape of research is changing rapidly. Ethical oversight is evolving from a regulatory requirement into a continuous commitment to responsible, transparent, and trustworthy research.

In recognition of these emerging realities, the Strathmore University Institutional Scientific and Ethics Review Committee (SU-ISERC), under the Research and Innovation Department, organised a three-day Research Ethics Training under the theme “Research Ethics in Practice: Addressing Compliance Gaps and Emerging Risks.”

Rather than revisiting familiar ethical principles, the forum held at Strathmore University explored how research ethics is adapting to a rapidly changing research landscape.

During the interactive forum interspersed with various case studies, the emerging reality was that research has entered a new era globally. Today, artificial intelligence can analyse vast amounts of data in seconds. Digital platforms have made it easier to recruit participants across continents. Researchers increasingly rely on existing datasets rather than collecting new data, while collaborative studies routinely involve institutions across several countries.

These advances are opening exciting opportunities for discovery. At the same time, they are raising ethical questions that traditional research frameworks were never designed to answer.

How should researchers protect privacy when using artificial intelligence? When does informed consent begin and truly end? Who remains accountable when research protocols change after ethical approval has been granted? And how should institutions govern the growing use of secondary data?

These questions formed the focus of the three-day SU-ISERC forum, which was designed to enlighten researchers, ethics committee members and research administrators on how responsible research should respond to changing technologies, new research methods and growing public expectations.

The first session, facilitated by a research ethics expert from the Kenya Medical Research Institute (KEMRI), challenged one of the most persistent misconceptions in research that obtaining a participant’s signature marks the end of informed consent.

Instead, Mr Enock Kebenei pointed out that consent should be an ongoing relationship built on trust, communication and respect for participants throughout the research process.

“Consent is a process, not a one-time event, ” he emphasised.

That message resonated throughout discussions on digital research, vulnerable populations and community engagement, where researchers often face situations that cannot be resolved by simply referring to a consent form.

Participants examined practical case studies demonstrating that ethical judgment requires continuous engagement with participants as research evolves.

The discussion reflected a broader shift in research ethics, from viewing consent as an administrative requirement to recognising it as an essential safeguard for protecting participants’ dignity and autonomy.

The second session, presented by Ms Yvonne Opanga of AMREF Ethics and Scientific Review Committee (AMREF ESRC), moved beyond the approval stage to examine what happens once research is underway.

Participants explored protocol deviations, post-approval monitoring, adverse event reporting and the ethical complexities of multi-site and cross-border research. As research increasingly brings together institutions operating under different regulatory systems, maintaining ethical standards requires continuous oversight, communication and shared accountability.

The discussion reinforced an important principle, noting that responsible research is measured not only by how studies begin but also by how they are conducted, monitored and concluded.

One of the key issues that emerged during this session is the growing importance of continuous post-approval monitoring, recognising that ethical oversight extends beyond the initial review to ensure studies remain compliant with approved protocols throughout their implementation.

The final presentation was facilitated by Dr. Fredrick Mutisya, from the Centre for Health AI Research Innovation and Implementation. He examined the growing use of artificial intelligence, digital tools, and secondary data.

Participants discussed privacy, algorithmic bias, transparency, data governance, responsible use of secondary data and the need for human oversight when AI supports research. Dr Mutisya emphasised that responsibility always lies with people and institutions, not with the algorithm itself.

“The central ethical question is not merely whether AI can analyse the data. It is whether the proposed use is lawful, necessary, fair, safe, scientifically sound, socially valuable, and accountable to the Kenyan people whose lives and information make the system possible,” said Dr Mutisya.

Rather than treating AI as either an opportunity or a threat, the discussion encouraged researchers to view it as a powerful tool whose value ultimately depends on responsible human decision-making.

Although each presentation focused on a different aspect of research ethics, together they illustrated a common theme, pointing out that ethical responsibility no longer begins and ends with obtaining approval before data collection starts.

Instead, ethics now extends across the entire research lifecycle, ranging from engaging participants and managing protocol changes to governing artificial intelligence and protecting digital information.

Through practical case studies and interactive discussions, the forum demonstrated that responsible research is increasingly defined by continuous accountability rather than one-time compliance.

As Strathmore University continues to strengthen its research enterprise, forums such as this are becoming increasingly important in fostering a culture of responsible and ethical research. Beyond examining emerging issues, the discussions underscored the need for continuous learning as research methods and technologies evolve.

Looking ahead, the Strathmore University Institutional Scientific and Ethics Review Committee hopes to broaden participation in future ethics training programmes.

Janet Awondo, Associate Manager of SU-ISERC, said the committee encourages greater participation and training uptake among University faculty and postgraduate students as part of its ongoing efforts to strengthen ethical research practice across the institution.

Article written by Otuma Ongalo.