Switch to: References

Add citations

You must login to add citations.
  1. The Experiences of Ethics Committee Members: Contradictions Between Individuals and Committees.L. Elliott & D. Hunter - 2008 - Journal of Medical Ethics 34 (6):489-494.
    The current system of ethical review for medical research in the United Kingdom is changing from the current system involving large committees of 7–18 members reviewing every individual application to a system involving pre-review by small sub-committees of National Research Ethics Officers , who have a remit to approve studies if they believe there are no material ethical issues imposed by the research. The reliability of this new system depends on the reliability of the NREAs and in particular the ability (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
    Export citation  
    Bookmark   8 citations  
  • Ethics Review of Research: In Pursuit of Proportionality.S. J. L. Edwards & R. Omar - 2008 - Journal of Medical Ethics 34 (7):568-572.
    The ethics review system of research is now well-established, at least in the developed world, although there are many differences in how countries view it and go about managing it. The UK specifically is now seeking to revise its system by speeding up the process of ethics approval but only for some studies. It is proposed that only those studies which pose “no material ethical issues” should be “fast-tracked”. However, it is unclear what this means, who should decide and what (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
    Export citation  
    Bookmark   3 citations  
  • Ethics and Research Governance: The Views of Researchers, Health-Care Professionals and Other Stakeholders.N. Hallowell, S. Cooke, G. Crawford, M. Parker & A. Lucassen - 2008 - Clinical Ethics 3 (2):85-90.
    The objective of this study is to describe researchers', health-care providers' and other stakeholders' views of ethical review and research governance procedures. The study design involved qualitative semi-structured interviews. Participants included 60 individuals who either undertook research in the subspecialty of cancer genetics (n = 40) or were involved in biomedical research in other capacities (n = 20), e.g. research governance and oversight, patient support groups or research funding. While all interviewees observed that oversight is necessary to protect research participants, (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
    Export citation  
    Bookmark   3 citations  
  • Recall of Participation in Research Projects in Cancer Genetics: Some Implications for Research Ethics.S. Cooke, G. Crawford, M. Parker, A. Lucassen & N. Hallowell - 2008 - Clinical Ethics 3 (4):180-184.
    The aim of this study is to assess patients' recall of their previous research participation. Recall was established during interviews and compared with entries from clinical notes. Participants were 49 patients who had previously participated in different types of research. Of the 49 patients, 45 (92%) interviewees recalled 69 of 109 (63%) study participations. Level of recall varied according to the type of research, some participants clearly recalled the details of research aims, giving consent and research procedures. Others recalled procedures (...)
    Direct download (6 more)  
    Export citation  
    Bookmark   4 citations