Community and public participation in the risk assessment of experimental clinical trials

Xenotransplantation

Volumn 14, Issue 4, 2007, Pages 356-358

  Tallacchini, Mariachiara ^a  

^a UNIVERSITÀ CATTOLICA DEL SACRO CUORE   (Italy)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

BIOSAFETY; COMMUNITY; CONFERENCE PAPER; DECISION MAKING; EXPERIMENT; HEALTH; HEALTH CARE POLICY; HUMAN; KNOWLEDGE; POLICY; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RISK ASSESSMENT; SCIENCE; SOCIETY;

EID: 34547447636     PISSN: 0908665X     EISSN: 13993089     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1399-3089.2007.00407_7.x     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (28)

1. OTA (U.S. Congress Office of Technology Assessment). The Regulatory Environment for Science - A Technical Memorandum, OTA-TM-SET-34, Washington, DC : U.S. Government Printing Office, 1986.
2. Wildavsky A. Speaking Truth to Power. Boston : Little Brown and Co, 1979.
3. Polanyi M. The republic of science. Minerva 1962 1 : 54 73.
4. Merton RK. Science and Democratic Social Structure in Social Theory and Social Structure. New York : Free Press, 1968 : 604 615.
5. Liberatore A, Funtowicz S. Special issue on democratising expertise, expertising democracy. Scie Public Policy 2003 3 : 30.
6. Council of Europe, Working Party on Xenotransplantation. Report on the State of the Art in the Field of Xenotransplantation. Strasbourg : Council of Europe, Working Party on Xenotransplantation, 2003.
7. Gallup/Partnership for Organ Donation. The American Public's Attitudes Toward Organ Donation and Transplantation. Boston, MA : Gallup/Partnership for Organ Donation, 1993.
8. Mohacsi PJ, Blumer CE, Quine S, Thompson JF. Aversion to xenotransplantation. Nature 1995 378 : 434.
9. Hagelin J. Public opinion surveys about xenotransplantation. Xenotransplantation 2004 11 : 551 558.
10. Ivinson J, Bach F. The xenotransplantation question: public consultation is an important part of the answer. Can Med Assoc J 2002 167 : 42 43.
11. Eisendel EF. Commentary: on the Position Paper of the Ethics Committee of the International Xenotransplantation Association. Transplantation 2004 78 : 1110 1111.
12. Wright J Jr. Alternative interpretations of the same data: flaws in the process of consulting the Canadian public about xenotransplantation issues. J Ayub Med Coll 2002 167 : 40 42.
13. Canadian Public Health Association. Animal-to-human transplantation: Should Canada proceed? A public consultation on Xenotransplantation, December 2001 (http://www.xeno.cpha.ca/english/index_e.htm).
14. National Health and Medical Research Council, Xenotransplantation Working Party. Animal-to-human transplantation research: How should Australia proceed? Response to the 2002 public consultation on Draft Guidelines and Discussion Paper on XT. Commonwealth of Australia, February 2003 (http://www.nhmrc.gov.au/ publications/_files/e55.pdf).
15. National Health and Medical Research Council, Xenotransplantation Working Party. Animal-to-human transplantation research: A guide for the community. Public consultation on XT 2003/04, Commonwealth of Australia, 2003 (http://www.nhmrc.gov.au/publications/_files/e54.pdf).
16. Tallacchini M. Commentary: regulatory issues in Europe and Canada. Xenotransplantation 2002 9 : 371 373.
17. Fishman J. SARS, Xenotransplantation and bioterrorism: preventing the next epidemic. Am J Transplant 2003 3 : 909-912.
18. Kobayashi T, Yamanouchi K. Commentary: the Cartagena protocol on biosafety: implications for xenotransplantation. Xenotransplantation 2006 13 : 10 11.
19. Sykes M, d'Apice A, Sandrin M. Position paper of the Ethics Committee of the International Xenotransplantation Association. Xenotransplantation 2003 10 : 194 203.
20. Davies G, Burgess J, Eames M et al. Deliberative Mapping: Appraising Options for Addressing 'the Kidney Gap'. Wellcome Trust (http://www. deliberative-mapping.org).
21. Leach M, Scoones I, Wynne B. Science and Citizens. Globalization & the Challenge of Engagement. London, New York : Zed Books, 2005.
22. World Health Organization (WHO). WHO, Regional Office for Europe. Health21: The 'Health for All' Policy Framework for the WHO European Region, European Health for All Series No. 6, Copenhagen, 125, 1999.
23. Commission of the European Communities. European Governance. A White Paper, Brussels, 2001. 25.7.2001 COM (2001). 428 final (http://europa.eu.int/ eur-lex/en/com/cnc/2001/com2001_0428en01.pdf).
24. Rhodes RAW. The new governance: governing without government. Polit Stud 1996 XLIV : 652 667.
25. Commission of The European Communities. Gover'Science. From science AND society to science IN society: towards a framework for 'co-operative research. Brussels : A European Commission Workshop Directorate-General Research, Governance and Scientific Advice Unit, 24-25 November, 2005 (http://ec.europa. eu/research/science-society/pdf/goverscience_final_report_en.pdf).
26. Commission of the European Communities. Science and Society, 2007. (December 2001) (http://ec.europa.eu/research/science-society/home_en.cfm).
27. National Health Service. The Expert Patient: A New Approach to Chronic Disease Management for the 21st Century, London : Department of Health, 2001.
28. World Health Organization (WHO). WHO The Bangkok Charter for Health Promotion in a Globalized World, 2005. 11 August 2005, 6th Global Conference on Health Promotion, Thailand.