Protection of health research participants in the United States: a review of two cases.

New Zealand bioethics journal Pub Date : 2004-06-01
Alison Douglass, Peter Crampton
{"title":"Protection of health research participants in the United States: a review of two cases.","authors":"Alison Douglass,&nbsp;Peter Crampton","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Two research-related deaths and controversies in the United States during recent years have raised public concern over the safety of research participants. This paper explores the reasons why, in two studies, there was a failure of ethical oversight. The issues exposed by these failures have international relevance as they could possibly occur anywhere where human health research is carried out. Five factors that contributed to these failures are highlighted: 1. failure to support and resource research ethics committees; 2. failure of the research oversight process to adequately assess the risks and benefits of research, while giving undue emphasis to informed consent; 3. conflicts of interest arising from financial relationships and research ethics committee membership; 4. lack of consistent oversight of privately funded research; and 5. incompetent or intentional failure to adhere by ethical guidelines. There is considerable headway to be made in the United States, as in other countries, in the fostering and maintenance of robust systems of human research oversight.</p>","PeriodicalId":87199,"journal":{"name":"New Zealand bioethics journal","volume":"5 2","pages":"6-12"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2004-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"New Zealand bioethics journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Two research-related deaths and controversies in the United States during recent years have raised public concern over the safety of research participants. This paper explores the reasons why, in two studies, there was a failure of ethical oversight. The issues exposed by these failures have international relevance as they could possibly occur anywhere where human health research is carried out. Five factors that contributed to these failures are highlighted: 1. failure to support and resource research ethics committees; 2. failure of the research oversight process to adequately assess the risks and benefits of research, while giving undue emphasis to informed consent; 3. conflicts of interest arising from financial relationships and research ethics committee membership; 4. lack of consistent oversight of privately funded research; and 5. incompetent or intentional failure to adhere by ethical guidelines. There is considerable headway to be made in the United States, as in other countries, in the fostering and maintenance of robust systems of human research oversight.

分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
对美国健康研究参与者的保护:对两个案例的审查。
近年来,美国发生了两起与研究相关的死亡事件和争议,引起了公众对研究参与者安全的关注。本文探讨了在两项研究中,道德监督失败的原因。这些失败所暴露的问题具有国际相关性,因为它们可能发生在进行人类健康研究的任何地方。本文强调了导致这些失败的五个因素:1。未能为研究伦理委员会提供支持和资源;2. 研究监督过程未能充分评估研究的风险和收益,同时过分强调知情同意;3.因财务关系和研究伦理委员会成员资格而产生的利益冲突;4. 缺乏对私人资助研究的持续监督;和5。不称职或故意不遵守道德准则。美国和其他国家一样,在培育和维持健全的人类研究监督制度方面,有相当大的进展有待取得。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
In that case: Shane is a professional rugby player who has a contract with a Super 12 team. Response. New Zealand's ethics committees. Journal of Bioethical Inquiry. Protection of health research participants in the United States: a review of two cases. Cytogeneticists' stories around the ethics and social consequences of their work: a New Zealand case study.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1