Literature DB >> 23289696

A non-paternalistic model of research ethics and oversight: assessing the benefits of prospective review.

Alex John London1.   

Abstract

This paper offers a non-paternalistic justification for prospective research review as providing a credible social assurance that the institutions of scientific advancement respect and affirm the moral equality of all community members and as creating a "market" in which stakeholders working to advance diverse ends also advance the common good.
© 2012 American Society of Law, Medicine & Ethics, Inc.

Mesh：

Year:  2012        PMID： 23289696     DOI： 10.1111/j.1748-720X.2012.00722.x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Law Med Ethics        ISSN： 1073-1105            Impact factor:   1.718


  9 in total

1.  In Defense of a Social Value Requirement for Clinical Research.

Authors:  David Wendler; Annette Rid
Journal:  Bioethics       Date:  2017-02       Impact factor: 1.898

Review 2.  Reviewing HIV-Related Research in Emerging Economies: The Role of Government Reviewing Agencies.

Authors:  Patrina Sexton; Katrina Hui; Donna Hanrahan; Mark Barnes; Jeremy Sugarman; Alex John London; Robert Klitzman
Journal:  Dev World Bioeth       Date:  2014-11-10       Impact factor: 2.294

Review 3.  Philosophical Foundations of Human Research Ethics.

Authors:  David B Resnik
Journal:  Perspect Biol Med       Date:  2022       Impact factor: 0.941

4.  Barriers to Effective Deliberation in Clinical Research Oversight.

Authors:  Danielle M Wenner
Journal:  HEC Forum       Date:  2016-09

5.  Incidental findings in the use of DNA to identify human remains: an ethical assessment.

Authors:  Lisa S Parker; Alex John London; Jay D Aronson
Journal:  Forensic Sci Int Genet       Date:  2012-10-30       Impact factor: 4.882

6.  Examining the Social Benefits Principle in Research with Human Participants.

Authors:  David B Resnik
Journal:  Health Care Anal       Date:  2018-03

7.  Reconfiguring Social Value in Health Research Through the Lens of Liminality.

Authors:  Agomoni Ganguli-Mitra; Edward S Dove; Graeme T Laurie; Samuel Taylor-Alexander
Journal:  Bioethics       Date:  2017-02       Impact factor: 1.898

8.  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

Review 9.  Unproven stem cell-based interventions and achieving a compromise policy among the multiple stakeholders.

Authors:  Kirstin R W Matthews; Ana S Iltis
Journal:  BMC Med Ethics       Date:  2015-11-04       Impact factor: 2.652
  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.