Review of a mock research protocol in functional neuroimaging by Canadian research ethics boards

Journal of Medical Ethics

Volumn 32, Issue 9, 2006, Pages 530-534

  de Champlain, J ^a   Patenaude, Johane ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF SHERBROOKE   (Canada)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ADULT; CANADA; CLASSIFICATION; CONTROLLED STUDY; FEMALE; HEALTH CARE ORGANIZATION; HOSPITAL PERSONNEL; HUMAN; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; MEDICAL DECISION MAKING; MEDICAL RESEARCH; METHODOLOGY; NEUROBIOLOGY; NEUROIMAGING; PUBLIC HOSPITAL; QUALITATIVE ANALYSIS; QUANTITATIVE ANALYSIS; QUESTIONNAIRE; RESEARCH ETHICS; REVIEW; SOCIAL ASPECT; SOCIOPATHY; UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL;

EID: 33748698057     PISSN: 03066800     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1136/jme.2005.012807     Document Type: Review

References (12)

1. The Nuremberg Code. http://www.frsq.gouv.qc.ac/fr/ethique/ pdfs_ethique/nuremberg_f.pdf Extrait du jugement du TMA, Nuremberg, 1947. (trad. française in F. Bayle, Croix gammée cantre csducée. Les expériences humaines en Allemagne penolant la Deukième Guerre Mondiale, Neustadt. Commission scientifique des crimes de guerre, 1950).
2. World Medical Association Declaration of Helsinki. Ethical principles for medical research involving human subjects. 2000. http://www.wma.net/ e/policy/b3.htm.
3. Council for International Organizations of Medical Sciences. International ethical guidelines for biomedical research involving human subjects. Council for International Organizations of Medical Sciences. 2002. http://www.cioms.ch/frame_guidelines_nov_2002.htm.
4. Emanuel EJ, Wendler D, Grady C. What makes clinical research ethical? JAMA 2000;283:2701-11.
5. Ministère de la Santé et des Services sociaux, Direction générale adjointe de l'evaluation de la recherche et des affaires extérieures. L'évaluation et le suivi éthiques des projets de recherche multicentriques: Mieux conjuguer protection des sujets, équité et efficacité, Orientations ministérielles. Québec: Ministère de la Santé et des Services sociaux, 2004.
6. Audy S. L'évaluation éthique des projets multicentriques problématiques et enieux éthiques. Montreal: Comité de liaison en éthique de la recherche de l'Université de Montréal, 2003.
7. Shah S, Whittle A, Wilfond B, et al. How do institutional review boards apply the federal risk and benefit standards for pediatric research? JAMA 2004;291:476-82.
8. Weijer C, Miller PB. When are research risks reasonable in relation to anticipated benefits? Nat Med 2004;10:570-3.
9. Weijer C. The ethical analysis of risk. J Law Med Ethics 2000;28:344-65.
10. Damasio AR, Van Allen MW. The neural basis of social behavior: ethical implications, Neuroethics: mapping the field, San Francisco, May 2002. [abstractl.
11. Moreno JD. Neuroethics: an agenda for neuroscience and society. Nat Rev Neurosci 2003;4:149-53.
12. Quirion R. Neurosciences and brain research state of the art and neuroethics. In: Unesco, ed. Proceedings: international bioethics committee of UNESCO ninth session (Montreal) 2003:59-64.