The ESRC research ethics framework and research ethics review at UK universities: Rebuilding the Tower of Babel REC by REC

Journal of Medical Ethics

Volumn 34, Issue 11, 2008, Pages 815-820

  Hunter, David L H ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF ULSTER   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ETHICS; HISTORY; HUMAN; NATIONAL HEALTH SERVICE; ORGANIZATION AND MANAGEMENT; PROFESSIONAL STANDARD; RESEARCH ETHICS; REVIEW; UNITED KINGDOM; UNIVERSITY;

ETHICS COMMITTEES, RESEARCH; ETHICS, RESEARCH; GREAT BRITAIN; HISTORY, 20TH CENTURY; HUMANS; STATE MEDICINE; UNIVERSITIES;

EID: 56749185804     PISSN: 03066800     EISSN: 14734257     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1136/jme.2008.024257     Document Type: Review

References (28)

1. Economic and Social Research Council. Research ethics framework (REF). Swindon, UK: ESRC, 2005. http://www.esrcsocietytoday.ac.uk/ ESRCInfoCentre/Images/ESRC_Re_Ethics_Frame_tcm6-11291.pdf (accessed 13 August 2008).
2. Corrigan O, Tutton R. What's in a name? Subjects, volunteers, participants and activists in clinical research. Clin Ethics 2006;1:101-4.
3. Hazelgrove J. The old faith and the new science: the Nuremberg code and human experimentation ethics in Britain, 1946-73. Soc Hist Med 2002;15:109-35.
4. Ashcroft RE. The ethics and governance of medical research: what does regulation have to do with morality? New Rev Bioeth 2003;1:41-58.
5. Pappworth MH. Human guinea pigs: a warning. Twentieth Century Magazine 1962;Autumn:66-75.
6. Pappworth MH. Human guinea pigs: experimentation on man. Boston: Beacon Press, 1967.
7. Royal College of Physicians of London. Report of the committee on the supervision of the ethics of clinical investigations in institutions. London: RCPL, 1967.
8. Department of Health. Local research ethics committees. London: Department of Health, 1991. http://www.dh.gov.uk/prod_consum_dh/idcplg? IdcService=GET_FILE&dID=18804&Rendition=Web (accessed 13 August 2008).
9. Department of Health. Report of the ad hoc advisory group on the operation of NHS research ethics committees - the Warner report. London: Department of Health, 2005. http://www.dh.gov.uk/assetRoot/04/11/24/17/ 04112417.pdf (accessed 13 August 2008).
10. Middle C, Johnson A, Petty T, et al. Ethics approval for a national postal survey: recent experience. BMJ 1995;311:659-60.
11. Garfield P. Applying to research ethics committees: a cross district comparison. BMJ 1995;311:660-1.
12. Alberti KGMM. Local research ethics committees. BMJ 1995;311:639-40.
13. Department of Health. Ethics committee review of multi-centre research: establishment of multicentre research ethics committees. Leeds: NHS Executive, 1997. http://www.dh.gov.uk/prod_consum_dh/idcplg?IdcService= GET_FILE&dID=17547&Rendition=Web (accessed 13 August 2008).
14. Tully J, Ninis N, Booy R, et al. The new system of review by multicentre research ethics committees: prospective study. BMJ 2000;320:1179-82.
15. Lewis JC, Tomkins SS, Sampson JR. Ethical approval for research involving geographically dispersed subjects: unsuitability of the UK MREC/LREC system and relevance to uncommon genetic disorders. J Med Ethics 2001;27:347-51.
16. Saunders J. Research ethics committees time for change? Clin Med 2002;2:534-8.
17. Maskell NA, Jones EL, Davies RJ. BTS/MRC MIST steering committee. Variations in experience in obtaining ethical approval for participation in a multi-centre study. QJM 2003;96:305-7.
18. Department of Health. Governance arrangements for NHS research ethics committees. London: Department of Health, 2001. http://www.dh.gov.uk/ prod_consum_dh/idcplg?IdcService=GET_FILE&dID=14867&Rendition=Web (accessed 13 August 2008).
19. Central Office for Research Ethics Committees. Standard operating procedures for research ethics committees. Version 3.5. London, National Research Ethics Service, National Patient Safety Agency, 2007. http://www.nres.npsa.nhs.uk/EasySiteWeb/GatewayLink.aspx?alId=11364 (accessed 15 August 2008).
20. Hunter D. Efficiency and the proposed reforms to the NHS research ethics system. J Med Ethics 2007;33:651-4.
21. Hunter D. Proportional ethical review and the identification of ethical issues. J Med Ethics 2007;33:241-5.
22. William-Jones BB, Holm S. University wide model for the ethical review of human subjects research. Res Ethics Rev 2005;1:39-44.
23. Holm SS, Irving LL. Research ethics committees in the social sciences. In: Kempf-Leonard K, ed. Encyclopedia of social measurement. London: Academic Press, 2004:397-402.
24. Tinker A, Coomber V. University research ethics committees: their role, remit and conduct. London: King's College London and the Nuffield Foundation, 2004. http://www.kcl.ac.uk/content/1/c6/02/96/45/ UniversityResearchEthicsCommittee.pdf (accessed 15 August 2008).
25. Hunter D. An alternative university-wide model for the ethical review of human subject research. Res Ethics Rev 2006;2:47-50.
26. Edwards SLJ, Ashcroft RE, Kirchin S. Research ethics committees: differences and moral judgement. Bioethics 2004;18:408-27.
27. Anderson-Ford D. UK universities research ethics committee working group joins AREC. Res Ethics Rev 2007 3;1:30-2.
28. The Department of Health and Human Services. Title 45 CFR Part, Code of federal regulations, [...] part 46: protection of human subjects. Bethesda, Maryland: National Institutes of Health, Office of Human Subjects Research, 2005. http://ohsr.od.nih.gov/guidelines/45cfr46.html#subparta (accessed 13 August 2008).