Ethics review of research and audit

British Medical Journal

Volumn 330, Issue 7489, 2005, Pages 431-432

  Abbasi, Kamran ^a   Heath, Iona ^a  

^a NONE

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

CLINICAL PRACTICE; CLINICAL RESEARCH; EDITORIAL; MEDICAL LITERATURE; MORALITY; PATIENT RIGHT; POLICY; PRIORITY JOURNAL; QUALITY CONTROL; RESEARCH ETHICS;

BIOMEDICAL AND BEHAVIORAL RESEARCH;

EID: 14644395501     PISSN: 09598146     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1136/bmj.330.7489.431     Document Type: Editorial

References (9)

1. Wade D. Ethics, audit, and research: all shades of grey. BMJ 2005;330:468-73.
2. Wald D. Bureaucracy of ethics applications. BMJ 2004;329:282-4.
3. Jamrozik K. Research ethics paperwork: what is the plot we seem to have lost BMJ 2004;329:286-7.
4. Parker M, Ashcroft R, Wilkie AOM, Kent A. Ethical review of research into rare genetic disorders. BMJ 2004;329:288-9.
5. Enderby P. Applications to local research ethics committees are down by around 40%. BMJ 2005;330:361.
6. Nurock S. Commentary: Patients may be less risk adverse than committees. BMJ 2005;330:471-2.
7. Alexander J. Commentary: Research ethics committees deserve support. BMJ 2005;330:472-3.
8. MacMillan J, Sheehan M. Commentary: Ethical review and ethical behaviour. BMJ 2005;330:473.
9. Committee on Publication Ethics. A code of conduct for editors of biomedical journals. www.publicationethics.org.uk/guidelines/code (accessed 21 Feb 2005).