Ensuring respect for persons when recruiting junior enlisted personnel for research

Military Medicine

Volumn 172, Issue 3, 2007, Pages 250-253

  Spence, Dennis L ^a  

^a Navy Medicine Manpower Personnel Training and Education Command   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ATTITUDE; HUMAN; INFORMED CONSENT; MEDICAL RESEARCH; NAVY; NORMAL HUMAN; PATIENT AUTONOMY; PERSONNEL; POLICY; PRACTICE GUIDELINE; PROTECTION; RESEARCH ETHICS; RESPECT; REVIEW; SOLDIER;

EID: 33947138069     PISSN: 00264075     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.7205/MILMED.172.3.250     Document Type: Review

References (17)

1. Fitzpatrick W, Zwanziger L: Defending against biochemical warfare: ethical issues involving the coercive use of investigational drugs and biologics in the military. J Philos Sci Law 2003; 3. Available at http://www6.miami.edu/ ethics/Jpsl/Archives/papers/drugs.html; accessed September 12, 2005.
2. Beauchamp T, Childress J: Principles of Biomedical Ethics, Ed 5. New York, Oxford University Press, 2001.
3. Department of Defense: DoD Directive 3216.2: Protection of Human Subjects and
4. Adherence to Ethical Standards in DoD-Supported Research. Washington, DC, Department of Defense, 2002. Available at http://www.duc.mil/whs/directives/ corres/html/32162.htm; accessed September 12, 2005.
5. Department of the Navy: BUMEDINST 3900.6B: Protection of Human Subjects. Washington, DC, Department of the Navy, 2001. Available at http://www.dtic.mil/ biosys/downloads/bumedinst3900-6B.pdf#search='BUMEDINST%203900.6b': accessed October 20, 2005. Available at http://www.dtic.mil/biosys/downloads/ bumedinst3900-6B.pdf.
6. Lederer S: Military personnel as research subjects. In: Encyclopedia of Bioethics. pp 1774-6. Edited by Reich W. New York, Simon and Schuster Macmillan, 1995.
7. Pearn J: Medical ethics surveillance in the armed forces. Milit Med 2000; 165: 351-4.
8. McManus J, Mehta SG, McClinton AR, De Lorenzo RA, Baskin TW: Informed consent and ethical issues in military medical research. Acad Emerg Med 2005; 12: 1120-6.
9. Office for Human Research Protections: IRB Guidebook. Washington, DC, Department of Health and Human Services, 2005. Available at http://www.hhs. gov/ohrp/irb/irb_guidebook.htm: accessed October 3, 2005.
10. Office of Human Subjects Research: The Belmont Report. Bethesda, MD, National Commission for the Protection of Human Subjects and Biomedical and Behavioral Research, 1979. Available at http://ohsr.od.nih.gov/guidelines/ belmont. html; accessed October 20, 2005.
11. Federal Regulations #32 CFR219: Protection of Human Subjects, 2000. Available at http://www.dtic.mil/biosys/downloads/32CFR219.pdf; accessed October 30, 2005.
12. Weinrich SP, Boyd MD, Herman J: Tool adaptation to reduce health disparities. In: Instruments for Clinical Health-Care Research, Ed 3, pp 20-32. Edited by Frank-Stromborg M, Olsen JJ, eds. Boston, MA, Jones and Bartlett, 2004.
13. Horng S, Grady C: Misunderstanding in clinical research: distinguishing therapeutic misconception, therapeutic misestimation, and therapeutic optimism. IRB 2003; 25: 11-6.
14. Nelson M, Merz J: Voluntariness of consent for research: an empirical and conceptual review. Med Care 2002; 40: 69-80.
15. Fairchild AL, Bayer R: Uses and abuses of Tuskegee. Science 1999; 284: 919-21.
16. Nuremburg Code. Available at http://www.ushmm.org/research/doctors/ Nuremberg_Code.htm; accessed September 12, 2005.
17. Merz J: Is human subjects research (ethics) in crisis? J Health Politics Policy Law 2000; 25: 979-87.