Literature DB >> 32342753

Expert Perspectives on Oversight for Unregulated mHealth Research: Empirical Data and Commentary.

Laura M Beskow1, Catherine M Hammack-Aviran1, Kathleen M Brelsford1, P Pearl O'Rourke1.   

Abstract

In qualitative interviews with a diverse group of experts, the vast majority believed unregulated researchers should seek out independent oversight. Reasons included the need for objectivity, protecting app users from research risks, and consistency in standards for the ethical conduct of research. Concerns included burdening minimal risk research and limitations in current systems of oversight. Literature and analysis supports the use of IRBs even when not required by regulations, and the need for evidence-based improvements in IRB processes.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2020        PMID: 32342753      PMCID: PMC7783510          DOI: 10.1177/1073110520917039

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


  30 in total

1.  What makes clinical research ethical?

Authors:  E J Emanuel; D Wendler; C Grady
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2000 May 24-31       Impact factor: 56.272

2.  Streamlining ethical review.

Authors:  Joseph Millum; Jerry Menikoff
Journal:  Ann Intern Med       Date:  2010-11-16       Impact factor: 25.391

3.  Meta-assessment of bias in science.

Authors:  Daniele Fanelli; Rodrigo Costas; John P A Ioannidis
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2017-03-20       Impact factor: 11.205

4.  The Tuskegee syphilis study.

Authors:  W M Cobb
Journal:  J Natl Med Assoc       Date:  1973-07       Impact factor: 1.798

5.  Ethics and clinical research.

Authors:  H K Beecher
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  1966-06-16       Impact factor: 91.245

6.  The Nuremberg Code 70 Years Later.

Authors:  Jonathan D Moreno; Ulf Schmidt; Steve Joffe
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2017-09-05       Impact factor: 56.272

7.  Federal Policy for the Protection of Human Subjects. Final rule.

Authors: 
Journal:  Fed Regist       Date:  2017-01-19

Review 8.  A systematic review of the empirical literature evaluating IRBs: what we know and what we still need to learn.

Authors:  Lura Abbott; Christine Grady
Journal:  J Empir Res Hum Res Ethics       Date:  2011-03       Impact factor: 1.742

9.  Clinical Research in Vulnerable Populations: Variability and Focus of Institutional Review Boards' Responses.

Authors:  Bärbel Kästner; Simone Behre; Nadine Lutz; Friederike Bürger; Steffen Luntz; Katrin Hinderhofer; Martin Bendszus; Georg F Hoffmann; Markus Ries
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2015-08-14       Impact factor: 3.240

10.  How do we know that research ethics committees are really working? The neglected role of outcomes assessment in research ethics review.

Authors:  Carl H Coleman; Marie-Charlotte Bouësseau
Journal:  BMC Med Ethics       Date:  2008-03-28       Impact factor: 2.652

View more
  3 in total

1.  Ethical Considerations in the Conduct of Unregulated mHealth Research: Expert Perspectives.

Authors:  Catherine M Hammack-Aviran; Kathleen M Brelsford; Laura M Beskow
Journal:  J Law Med Ethics       Date:  2020-03       Impact factor: 1.718

2.  "A cohort of pirate ships": biomedical citizen scientists' attitudes toward ethical oversight.

Authors:  Meredith Trejo; Isabel Canfield; Whitney Bash Brooks; Alex Pearlman; Christi J Guerrini
Journal:  Citiz Sci       Date:  2021-05-20

3.  Ethics review of big data research: What should stay and what should be reformed?

Authors:  Agata Ferretti; Marcello Ienca; Mark Sheehan; Alessandro Blasimme; Edward S Dove; Bobbie Farsides; Phoebe Friesen; Jeff Kahn; Walter Karlen; Peter Kleist; S Matthew Liao; Camille Nebeker; Gabrielle Samuel; Mahsa Shabani; Minerva Rivas Velarde; Effy Vayena
Journal:  BMC Med Ethics       Date:  2021-04-30       Impact factor: 2.652

  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.