PubMed Health⌕ Search
Home/Archive/PubMed

PubMed · 12528967

Research ethics committees--time for change?

John Saunders
View original source ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

Research ethics committees have developed over the last 30 years in the UK. As their roles and responsibilities have grown, so too has the complexity of their work. This poses increasing problems which cannot be solved within the current structure. This article suggests that the present large number of volunteer committees be replaced by a much smaller number of fully professional bodies in order to increase speed, efficiency and consistency of working.

Explore related subjects

Ethical ReviewEthics CommitteesGuidelines as TopicHumansResearchUnited KingdomBiomedical and Behavioral ResearchJournal Article

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

John Saunders. Research ethics committees--time for change?. https://doi.org/10.7861/clinmedicine.2-6-534

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

PubMed2006

Descriptive ethics: a qualitative study of local research ethics committees in Mexico.

OBJECTIVE: To describe how local research ethics committees (LRECs) consider and apply research ethics in the evaluation of biomedical research proposals. DESIGN: A qualitative study was conducted using purposeful sampling, focus groups and a grounded theory approach to generate data and to analyse the work of the LRECs. SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: 11 LRECs of the Mexican Institute of Social Security (IMSS). RESULTS: LRECs considered ethics to be implicit in all types of research, but that ethics reviews were only necessary for projects that included the direct participation of human beings. The LRECs appeared to understand the importance of consent, as in the completion of a consent form, but did not emphasise the importance of the process of acquiring 'informed' consent. The committees considered their main roles or functions to be: (a) to improve the methodological quality of research and to verify - if applicable - the ethical aspects; (b) to encourage personnel to undergo research training; (c) to follow-up research to oversee the adherence to norms and compliance with a specified research timetable. CONCLUSIONS: This study provides a valuable insight into how these LRECs understand the ethical review process. The emphasis of the committees was on rules, regulations, improving research methodology and research training, rather than a focus on efforts to protect the rights and well being of research subjects. The results encourage further normative and descriptive lines of investigation concerning education and the development of LRECs.

Ethical Review↗