Cross district comparison of applications to research ethics committees

BMJ

Volumn 311, Issue 7006, 1995, Pages 660-

  Garfield, Paul ^a  

^a Greenwood Institute of Child Health   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; AUTHORITY; COMPARATIVE STUDY; GEOGRAPHIC DISTRIBUTION; HEALTH CARE NEED; MEDICAL RESEARCH; MENTAL HEALTH; MULTICENTER STUDY; OFFENDER; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROFESSIONAL PRACTICE; WORKLOAD;

ADOLESCENTS; BEHAVIOR DISORDERS; BEHAVIORAL RESEARCH; BIOMEDICAL AND BEHAVIORAL RESEARCH; CLINICAL APPROACH/SOURCE; EVALUATION; GREAT BRITAIN; NATIONAL HEALTH SERVICE; REGIONAL ETHICS COMMITTEES; STANDARDS;

ENGLAND; ETHICAL REVIEW; ETHICS COMMITTEES; ETHICS COMMITTEES, RESEARCH; MULTICENTER STUDIES; RESEARCH SUPPORT; SUPPORT, NON-U.S. GOV'T;

EID: 0029153787     PISSN: 09598138     EISSN: 14685833     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1136/bmj.311.7006.660     Document Type: Article

References (5)

1. Meade TW. The trouble with ethics committees. J R Coll Physicians Lond 1994; 28: 102–4.
2. Hotopf M Wessely S Noah N. Are ethical committees reliable? J R Soc Med 1995; 88: 31–3.
3. Department of Health. Local research ethics committees. London: HMSO, 1991.
4. Cookson JB. Auditing a research ethics committee. J R Coll Physicians Lond 1992; 26: 181–3.
5. Warnock M. A national ethics committee. BMJ 1988; 297: 1626–7.