Ethics review of research projects involving human subjects

Quest

Volumn 54, Issue 3, 2002, Pages 196-204

  Olivier, Steve ^a  

^a NORTHUMBRIA UNIVERSITY   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 3342929875     PISSN: 00336297     EISSN: 15432750     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/00336297.2002.10491774     Document Type: Article

References (21)

1. Annas, G.J. (1991). Ethics committees: From ethical comfort to ethical cover. The Hastings Center Report, 21, 18-21.
2. Azar, B. (2002). Ethics at the cost of research? Monitor on Psychology, 33(2). URL: http://www.apa.org/monitor/feb02/ethicscost.html.
3. Bok, S. (1978). Freedom and risk., Proceedings of The American Academy of Arts And Sciences, 107, 115-127.
4. Brodie, D.A., & Stopani, K. (1990). Experimental ethics in sports medicine research. Sports Medicine, 9, 143-150.
5. Department of Health and Human Services, National Institutes of Health, Office for Protection from Research Risks. (2001). Title 45 Public Welfare, Part 46 Protection of Human Subjects. Code of Federal Regulations. URL: http://ohrp.osophs.dhhs.gov/humansubjects/guidance/45cfr46.htm.
6. Flynn, S., Dixon, C., Amos, T., & Appleby, L. (2000). The cost of getting approval. British Medical Journal, 320(7243), 1183.
7. Hoffman, D., Tarzian, A., & O'Neil, J.A. (2000). Are ethics committee members competent to consult? Journal of Law, Medicine, and Ethics, 28(1), 30.
8. Jago, R., & Bailey, R. (2001). Ethics and paediatric exercise science: Issues and making a submission to a local ethics and research committee. Journal of Sports Sciences, 19, 527-535.
9. Kabat, T. (1975). Ethics and the wrong answer. Science, 189(4202), 505.
10. Kroll, W. (1993). Ethical issues in human research. Quest, 45, 32-44.
11. Lancet. (2001). Improving the safety of patients during clinical research (editorial). Lancet, 357, 2067.
12. Lux, A.L., Edwards, S.W., & Osborne, W.P. (2000). Responses of local research ethics committees to a study with approval from a multicentre research ethics committee. British Medical Journal, 320(7243), 1182.
13. Mosher, D.L. (1988). Balancing the rights of subjects, scientists, and society: 10 principles for human subject committees. The Journal of Sex Research, 24, 378-385.
14. MRC Guidelines on Ethics for Medical Research (revised edition). (1993). Cape Town: South African Medical Research Council.
15. Pettit, P. (1992). Instituting a research ethic: Chilling and cautionary tales. Bioethics, 6(2), 89-112.
16. Price, D.K. (1978). Endless frontier or bureaucratic morass? Daedalus(American Academy of Arts and Sciences), 107, 75-92.
17. Rosnow, R.L. (1990). Teaching research ethics through role-play and discussion. Teaching ofPsychology, 17(3), 179-181.
18. Rosnow, RL., Rotherham-Borus, M.J., Ceci, S.J., Blanck, P.D., & Koocher, G.P. (1993). The institutional review board as a mirror of scientific and ethical standards. American Psychologist, 48(7), 821-826.
19. Stetten, D. (1975). Freedom of inquiry. Science, 189(4207), 953.
20. Tully, J., Ninis, N., Booy, R., & Viner, R. (2000). The new system of review by multicentre research ethics committees: Prospective study. British Medical Journal, 320(7243), 1179.
21. Zelaznik, H.N. (1993). Ethical issues in conducting and reporting research: A reaction to Kroll, Matt, and Safrit. Quest, 45, 62-68.