Literature DB >> 14872082

Non-therapeutic research with minors: how do chairpersons of German research ethics committees decide?

C Lenk1, K Radenbach, M Dahl, C Wiesemann.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: Clinical trials in humans in Germany-as in many other countries-must be approved by local research ethics committees (RECs). The current study has been designed to document and evaluate decisions of chairpersons of RECs in the problematic field of non-therapeutic research with minors. The authors' purpose was to examine whether non-therapeutic research was acceptable for chairpersons at all, and whether there was certainty on how to decide in research trials involving more than minimal risk.
DESIGN: In a questionnaire, REC chairpersons had to evaluate five different scenarios with (in parts) non-therapeutic research. The scenarios described realistic potential research projects with minors, involving increasing levels of risk for the research participants. The chairpersons had to decide whether the respective projects should be approved.
METHODS: A total of 49 German REC chairpersons were sent questionnaires; 29 questionnaires were returned. The main measurements were approval or rejection of research scenarios.
RESULTS: Chairpersons of German RECs generally tend to accept non-therapeutic research with minors if the apparent risk for the participating children is low. If the risk is clearly higher than "minimal", the chairpersons' decisions differ widely.
CONCLUSION: The fact that there seem to be different attitudes of chairpersons to non-therapeutic research with minors is problematic from an ethical point of view. It suggests a general uncertainty about the standards of protection for minor research participants in Germany. Therefore, further ethical and legal regulation of non-therapeutic research with minors in Germany seems necessary.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Biomedical and Behavioral Research; Empirical Approach

Mesh:

Year:  2004        PMID: 14872082      PMCID: PMC1757133          DOI: 10.1136/jme.2003.005900

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Med Ethics        ISSN: 0306-6800            Impact factor:   2.903


  5 in total

1.  Do U.S. regulations allow more than minor increase over minimal risk pediatric research? Should they?

Authors:  David Wendler
Journal:  IRB       Date:  2013 Nov-Dec

2.  Setting risk thresholds in biomedical research: lessons from the debate about minimal risk.

Authors:  Annette Rid
Journal:  Monash Bioeth Rev       Date:  2014 Mar-Jun

3.  Views of adolescents and parents on pediatric research without the potential for clinical benefit.

Authors:  David Wendler; Emily Abdoler; Lori Wiener; Christine Grady
Journal:  Pediatrics       Date:  2012-09-10       Impact factor: 7.124

4.  Off-label, off-limits? Parental awareness and attitudes towards off-label use in paediatrics.

Authors:  Christian Lenk; Philipp Koch; Hildegard Zappel; Claudia Wiesemann
Journal:  Eur J Pediatr       Date:  2009-03-11       Impact factor: 3.183

5.  Non-beneficial pediatric research: individual and social interests.

Authors:  Jan Piasecki; Marcin Waligora; Vilius Dranseika
Journal:  Med Health Care Philos       Date:  2015-02
  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.