Literature DB >> 15994364

What is the role of the research ethics committee? Paternalism, inducements, and harm in research ethics.

E Garrard1, A Dawson.   

Abstract

In a recent paper Edwards, Kirchin, and Huxtable have argued that research ethics committees (RECs) are often wrongfully paternalistic in their approach to medical research. They argue that it should be left to competent potential research subjects to make judgments about the acceptability of harms and benefits relating to research, and that this is not a legitimate role for any REC. They allow an exception to their overall antipaternalism, however, in that they think RECs should have the power to prohibit the use of financial inducements to recruit research subjects into trials. In this paper it is argued that these claims are unjustified and implausible. A sketch is provided of an alternative model of the role of the REC as an expert body making judgments about the acceptability of research proposals through a consensual weighing of different moral considerations.

Keywords:  Analytical Approach; Biomedical and Behavioral Research

Mesh:

Year:  2005        PMID: 15994364      PMCID: PMC1734180          DOI: 10.1136/jme.2004.010447

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


  8 in total

1.  [Alkalization, ammonia and urea in urine in kidney diseases].

Authors:  A KLISIECKI; Z WIKTOR; M PYTASZ; L DEC
Journal:  Pol Tyg Lek       Date:  1961-12-25

2.  Research ethics committees and paternalism.

Authors:  S J L Edwards; S Kirchin; R Huxtable
Journal:  J Med Ethics       Date:  2004-02       Impact factor: 2.903

3.  Not just autonomy--the principles of American biomedical ethics.

Authors:  S Holm
Journal:  J Med Ethics       Date:  1995-12       Impact factor: 2.903

4.  Making sense of randomization; responses of parents of critically ill babies to random allocation of treatment in a clinical trial.

Authors:  C Snowdon; J Garcia; D Elbourne
Journal:  Soc Sci Med       Date:  1997-11       Impact factor: 4.634

5.  New study reports that diet is critical to cancer prevention.

Authors:  C White
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  1997-10-04

6.  The framing of decisions and the psychology of choice.

Authors:  A Tversky; D Kahneman
Journal:  Science       Date:  1981-01-30       Impact factor: 47.728

7.  Lay conceptions of the ethical and scientific justifications for random allocation in clinical trials.

Authors:  Elizabeth J Robinson; Cicely Kerr; Andrew Stevens; Richard Lilford; David Braunholtz; Sarah Edwards
Journal:  Soc Sci Med       Date:  2004-02       Impact factor: 4.634

8.  "Why don't they just tell me straight, why allocate it?" The struggle to make sense of participating in a randomised controlled trial.

Authors:  Katie Featherstone; Jenny L Donovan
Journal:  Soc Sci Med       Date:  2002-09       Impact factor: 4.634

  8 in total
  15 in total

Review 1.  Contesting the science/ethics distinction in the review of clinical research.

Authors:  Angus J Dawson; Steve M Yentis
Journal:  J Med Ethics       Date:  2007-03       Impact factor: 2.903

Review 2.  Proportional ethical review and the identification of ethical issues.

Authors:  D Hunter
Journal:  J Med Ethics       Date:  2007-04       Impact factor: 2.903

3.  Can significant differences in regulating medical and non-medical research be justified?

Authors:  David Hunter
Journal:  Monash Bioeth Rev       Date:  2014 Sep-Dec

Review 4.  Pediatric clinical drug trials in low-income countries: key ethical issues.

Authors:  S M MacLeod; D C Knoppert; M Stanton-Jean; D Avard
Journal:  Paediatr Drugs       Date:  2015-02       Impact factor: 3.022

5.  Using EHRs to integrate research with patient care: promises and challenges.

Authors:  Chunhua Weng; Paul Appelbaum; George Hripcsak; Ian Kronish; Linda Busacca; Karina W Davidson; J Thomas Bigger
Journal:  J Am Med Inform Assoc       Date:  2012-04-29       Impact factor: 4.497

6.  Changes in the institutional review board submission process for multicenter research over 6 years.

Authors:  Monika Pogorzelska; Patricia W Stone; Elizabeth Gross Cohn; Elaine Larson
Journal:  Nurs Outlook       Date:  2010 Jul-Aug       Impact factor: 3.250

7.  Protecting and respecting the vulnerable: existing regulations or further protections?

Authors:  Stephanie R Solomon
Journal:  Theor Med Bioeth       Date:  2013-02

8.  The role of research ethics committees in making decisions about risk.

Authors:  Allison Ross; Nafsika Athanassoulis
Journal:  HEC Forum       Date:  2014-09

9.  Role of Pharmacovigilance in India: An overview.

Authors:  Sanvidhan G Suke; Prabhat Kosta; Harsh Negi
Journal:  Online J Public Health Inform       Date:  2015-07-01

10.  Ethical issues in clinical research.

Authors:  Vasantha Muthuswamy
Journal:  Perspect Clin Res       Date:  2013-01
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.