Literature DB >> 15341040

To strengthen consensus, consult the stakeholders.

Cheryl Cox Macpherson1.   

Abstract

CIOMS has been criticised for not adequately consulting stakeholders about its revised ethical guidelines regarding medical research. Political and logistical issues that arise in democratic processes and open exchange of information probably contributed to this exclusion. What might CIOMS have done to be more inclusive and attain broader consensus on its proposed revisions? Consensus is dynamic, and evolves as a community digests new information and perspectives. Engaging the public (and particularly the stakeholders) in discussion about the revisions would have generated broader consensus. It would have encouraged more stakeholders (i.e. researchers, potential research participants, research institutions, or governments) to buy in. CIOMS needs a process to encourage dialogue and stakeholder input. The CIOMS guidelines themselves promote stakeholder consultation and capacity building, but CIOMS has done relatively little to distribute or promote its own guidelines. CIOMS should do more to promote its revised guidelines, and engage stakeholders in dialogue. This paper explores the bioethics debate about universal and relative values to illustrate the value of consultation and consensus building. It concludes that like research sponsors, CIOMS and similar organisations have an ethical responsibility to facilitate capacity building in less developed areas, and to participate more actively in consensus building.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Biomedical and Behavioral Research; Council for International Organizations of Medical Sciences; International Ethical Guidelines for Biomedical Research Involving Human Subjects

Mesh:

Year:  2004        PMID: 15341040     DOI: 10.1111/j.1467-8519.2004.00395.x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Bioethics        ISSN: 0269-9702            Impact factor:   1.898


  5 in total

1.  Global bioethics: did the universal declaration on bioethics and human rights miss the boat?

Authors:  Cheryl Cox Macpherson
Journal:  J Med Ethics       Date:  2007-10       Impact factor: 2.903

2.  Exploring ethical considerations for the use of biological and physiological markers in population-based surveys in less developed countries.

Authors:  Gregory Pappas; Adnan A Hyder
Journal:  Global Health       Date:  2005-11-28       Impact factor: 4.185

3.  Enrolling adolescents in research on HIV and other sensitive issues: lessons from South Africa.

Authors:  Jerome Amir Singh; Salim S Abdool Karim; Quarraisha Abdool Karim; Koleka Mlisana; Carolyn Williamson; Clive Gray; Michelle Govender; Andrew Gray
Journal:  PLoS Med       Date:  2006-04-18       Impact factor: 11.069

4.  Beginning community engagement at a busy biomedical research programme: experiences from the KEMRI CGMRC-Wellcome Trust Research Programme, Kilifi, Kenya.

Authors:  Vicki Marsh; Dorcas Kamuya; Yvonne Rowa; Caroline Gikonyo; Sassy Molyneux
Journal:  Soc Sci Med       Date:  2008-04-02       Impact factor: 4.634

5.  Capacity building efforts and perceptions for wildlife surveillance to detect zoonotic pathogens: comparing stakeholder perspectives.

Authors:  Jessica S Schwind; Tracey Goldstein; Kate Thomas; Jonna A K Mazet; Woutrina A Smith
Journal:  BMC Public Health       Date:  2014-07-04       Impact factor: 3.295

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.