Literature DB >> 17400625

Proportional ethical review and the identification of ethical issues.

D Hunter1.   

Abstract

Presently, there is a movement in the UK research governance framework towards what is referred to as proportional ethical review. Proportional ethical review is the notion that the level of ethical review and scrutiny given to a research project ought to reflect the level of ethical risk represented by that project. Relatively innocuous research should receive relatively minimal review and relatively risky research should receive intense scrutiny. Although conceptually attractive, the notion of proportional review depends on the possibility of effectively identifying the risks and ethical issues posed by an application with some process other than a full review by a properly constituted research ethics committee. In this paper, it is argued that this cannot be achieved and that the only appropriate means of identifying risks and ethical issues is consideration by a full committee. This implies that the suggested changes to the National Health Service research ethics system presently being consulted on should be strenuously resisted.

Mesh:

Year:  2007        PMID: 17400625      PMCID: PMC2652784          DOI: 10.1136/jme.2006.016782

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


  6 in total

1.  Commentary: the wizard of oughts.

Authors:  G Scofield
Journal:  J Law Med Ethics       Date:  2000       Impact factor: 1.718

2.  Research ethics committees--time for change?

Authors:  John Saunders
Journal:  Clin Med (Lond)       Date:  2002 Nov-Dec       Impact factor: 2.659

3.  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

Review 4.  What is the role of the research ethics committee? Paternalism, inducements, and harm in research ethics.

Authors:  E Garrard; A Dawson
Journal:  J Med Ethics       Date:  2005-07       Impact factor: 2.903

Review 5.  Meeting the challenges facing research ethics committees: some practical suggestions.

Authors:  J Blunt; J Savulescu; A J Watson
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  1998-01-03

6.  Research ethics committees: differences and moral judgement.

Authors:  Sarah J L Edwards; Richard Ashcroft; Simon Kirchin
Journal:  Bioethics       Date:  2004-09       Impact factor: 1.898

  6 in total
  7 in total

1.  Efficiency and the proposed reforms to the NHS research ethics system.

Authors:  David Hunter
Journal:  J Med Ethics       Date:  2007-11       Impact factor: 2.903

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

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

3.  Non-equivalent stringency of ethical review in the Baltic States: a sign of a systematic problem in Europe?

Authors:  E Gefenas; V Dranseika; A Cekanauskaite; K Hug; S Mezinska; E Peicius; V Silis; A Soosaar; M Strosberg
Journal:  J Med Ethics       Date:  2010-07       Impact factor: 2.903

4.  The Challenge of Timely, Responsive and Rigorous Ethics Review of Disaster Research: Views of Research Ethics Committee Members.

Authors:  Matthew Hunt; Catherine M Tansey; James Anderson; Renaud F Boulanger; Lisa Eckenwiler; John Pringle; Lisa Schwartz
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2016-06-21       Impact factor: 3.240

5.  Why research ethics should add retrospective review.

Authors:  Angus Dawson; Sapfo Lignou; Chesmal Siriwardhana; Dónal P O'Mathúna
Journal:  BMC Med Ethics       Date:  2019-10-10       Impact factor: 2.652

6.  Exempting low-risk health and medical research from ethics reviews: comparing Australia, the United Kingdom, the United States and the Netherlands.

Authors:  Anna Mae Scott; Simon Kolstoe; M C Corrette Ploem; Zoë Hammatt; Paul Glasziou
Journal:  Health Res Policy Syst       Date:  2020-01-28

7.  A Qualitative Study on Experiences and Perspectives of Members of a Dutch Medical Research Ethics Committee.

Authors:  Rien M J P A Janssens; Wieke E van der Borg; Maartje Ridder; Mariëlle Diepeveen; Benjamin Drukarch; Guy A M Widdershoven
Journal:  HEC Forum       Date:  2020-03
  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.