Revisión ética de estudios epidemiólogicos: Una necesidad y una propuesta

Medicina Clinica

Volumn 111, Issue 15, 1998, Pages 587-591

  Dal Ré, Rafael ^a   Tormo, Ma José ^b   Pérez, Gloria ^c   Bolúmar, Francisco ^d  

^a GLAXOSMITHKLINE   (United Kingdom)

^b HOSPITAL GENERAL UNIVERSITARIO REINA SOFÍA   (Spain)

^c GENERALITAT DE CATALUNYA   (Spain)

^d UNIVERSITY OF ALICANTE   (Spain)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EPIDEMIOLOGY; HUMAN; MEDICAL ETHICS; REVIEW;

EPIDEMIOLOGY; ETHICS, MEDICAL; HUMANS;

EID: 2542583842     PISSN: 00257753     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Review

References (40)

1. Last JM. Obligations and responsabilities of epidemiologists to research subjects. J Clin Epidemiol 1991; 44 (Supl 1): 95-101.
2. Westrin CG, Nilstrum T. The ethics of data utilisation: a comparison between epidemiology and journalism. Br Med J 1994; 308: 522-523.
3. a ed.). Londres: The Royal College of Physicians of London, 1996.
4. CIOMS. International guidelines for ethical review of epidemiological Studies. Ginebra: Council For International Organizations of Medical Sciences, 1991.
5. Dal-Ré R. Comités éticos de investigación clinica: algo más que el cambio de nombre. Med Clin (Barc) 1995; 105: 580-582.
6. Department of Health and Human Services. Protection of human subjects. Code of Federal Regulations: 45 CRF 46. Edición del 10 de enero de 1995.
7. The National Comission for the Protection of Human Subjects of Biomedical and Behavioral Research. The Belmont Report. Ethical Principles and Guidelines for the Protection of Human Subjects of Research, 18 ce Abril de 1979.
8. Herxheimer A. The rights of the patient in clinical research. Lancet 1988; 4: 1.128-1.130.
9. Patullo EL. Institutional review boards and the freedom to take risks. N Engl J Med 1982; 307: 1.156-1.159.
10. Capron AM. Protection of research subjects: do special rules apply in epidemiology? J Clin Epidemiol 1991; 44 (Supl 1): 81-89.
11. Susser M, Stein Z, Kline J. Ethics in epidemiology. Ann Am Acad Polit Soc Sci 1978; 437: 128-141.
12. Levine RJ. New international ethical guidelines for research involving humans subjects. Ann Intern Med 1993; 119: 339-341.
13. Soskolne CL. Epidemology: questions of science, ethics, morality and law. Am J Epidemiol 1989; 129: 1-18.
14. Last JM. Epidemiology and ethics. Law Med Heath Care 1991; 19: 166-174.
15. Pelerin M, Hall SM. Ethics and multicentre research projects. Br Med J 1992; 304: 1.696.
16. Real Decreto 561/1993. de 16 de abril. BOE, 13 de mayo de 1993.
17. Last JM. Guidelines on ethics for epidemiologists. Int J Epidemiol 1990; 19: 226-229.
18. Report of a working group to the Royal College of Physicians Committee on ethical issues in medicine. J R Coll Physicians (Lond) 1994; 28: 439-443.
19. Department of Health. Local Research Ethics Committees. HSG 91-5, 19 de agosto de 1991.
20. Moodie PCE. Marshall T. Guidelines for local research ethics committees Br Med J 1992; 304: 1.293-1.295.
21. Kaur B, Taylor J. Separate criteria should be drawn up for questionnaire based epidemiological studies. Br Med J 1996; 312: 54.
22. Middle C, Johnson A, Petty T, Sims L, Mac'arlane A Ethics approval for national post survey: recent experience. Br Med J 1995; 311: 659-670.
23. While AE. Ethics committees: impediments to research of guardians of ethical standars? Br Med J 1995; 311: 661.
24. Cann CI. Rothman KJ. IRBs and Epidemiologic research: how inappropiate restr ctions hamper studies. IRB Rev Hum Subj Res 1984; 6: 5-7.
25. Hetopf M. Wessely S, Noah N. Are ethical committees reliable? J R Soc Med 1995; 88: 31-33.
26. Clayton EW, Steinberg KK, Khoury MJ, Thomson E. Audrews L. Kahn MJE. Informed consent for genetic research on stored tissue samples. JAMA 1995; 274: 1.786-1.792.
27. Robinson K. The layman's role in a research ethics committee. J R Coll Physicians (Lond) 1991; 25: 43.
28. Rothman KJ. The rise and fall of epidemiology. 1950-2000 A.D. N Engl J Med 1981; 304: 600-602.
29. Benster R, Pollock AM. Guidelines for local research ethics committees: distinguishing between patient and population research in multicentre research project. Pub Health 1993; 107: 3-7.
30. Garfield P. Cross district comparison of applications to research ethics committees. Br Med J 1995; 311: 660-661.
31. Penn ZJ, Steer PJ. Local research ethics committees: hindrance or help? Br J Obstet Gynaecol 1995; 102: 1-2.
32. Alberti KGMM. Local research ethics committees. Br Med J 1995; 311: 639-640.
33. Meade TW. The trouble with ethics committees. J R Coll Physicians (Lond) 1994; 28: 102-104.
34. Horwitz R, Cheetham CH. Ethics and multicentre research projects. Br Med J 1992; 304: 1,446.
35. Macara AW. Too many ethics committees. Br Med J 1991; 302: 54.
36. Neuberger J. Ethics and health care. The role of research ethics committees in the United Kingdom. Research report 13. Londres: King's Fund Institute, 1992.
37. Drury M. Ethics and multicentre research projects. Br Med J 1992; 304: 1.696.
38. Walling MIL, Dewhurst JK. Current experience of central versus local ethics approval in multicentre studies. J R Coll Physicians (Lond) 1993; 27: 399-402.
39. Ortega R, Dal-Ré R. Clinical trials committees: how long is the protocol review and approval process in Spain? A prospective study. IRB Rev Hum Subj Res 1995; 17: 6-9.
40. Guallar E, Conde J, De la Cal MA, Martin-Moreno JM, en nombre del Grupo de Evaluación de la Actividad del Fondo de Investigaciones Sanitarias entre 1988 y 1995. Guia para la evaluación de proyectos de investigación en ciencias de la salud. Med Clin (Barc) 1997; 108: 460-471.