In the lion's den? Experiences of interaction with research ethics committees

Journal of Medical Ethics

Volumn 38, Issue 4, 2012, Pages 224-227

  Fistein, Elizabeth ^a   Quilligan, Sally ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CAMBRIDGE   (United Kingdom)

^b UNIVERSITY OF CAMBRIDGE   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; EDUCATION; ETHICS; HUMAN; LEGAL ASPECT; MEDICAL RESEARCH; ORGANIZATION AND MANAGEMENT; PERSONNEL; PROFESSIONAL STANDARD; PSYCHOLOGICAL ASPECT; STANDARD;

BIOMEDICAL RESEARCH; ETHICS COMMITTEES, RESEARCH; HUMANS; RESEARCH PERSONNEL;

EID: 84860517346     PISSN: 03066800     EISSN: 14734257     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1136/medethics-2011-100124     Document Type: Article

References (21)

1. Department of Health. Governance Arrangements for NHS Research Ethics Committees. London: Department of Health, 2001:6.
2. Vollman J, Winnau R. Informed consent in human experimentation before the Nuremberg Code. BMJ 1996;313:1445-7.
3. Trials of War Criminals before the Nuremberg Military Tribunals under Control Council Law No. 10. Vol. 2. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1949:181e2. http://ohsr.od.nih.gov/guidelines/nuremberg.html (accessed 12 Oct 2009).
4. Watson L, Rayner J, Lumley J. Hospital ethics approval for a population-based case-control study of very pre-term birth. Aust Health Rev 2007;31:514-22.
5. National Patient Safety Agency. REC Membership, 2011. http://www.nres.npsa.nhs.uk/aboutus/about-recs (accessed 12 Jul 2011).
6. Cave E, Holm S. New governance arrangements for research ethics committees: is facilitating research achieved at the cost of participants' interest. J Med Ethics 2002;28:318-21.
7. Savulescu J. Two deaths and two lessons: is it time to review the structure and function of research ethics committees? J Med Ethics 2002;28:1-2.
8. Kerrison S, Pollock A. The reform of UK research ethics committees: throwing the baby out with the bath water? J Med Ethics 2005;31:487-9.
9. Hearnshaw H. Comparison of requirements of research ethics committees in 11 European countries for a non-invasive interventional study. BMJ 2004;328:140-1.
10. Allen L. Caught in the act: ethics committee review and researching the sexual culture of schools. Qual Res 2009;9:395-410.
11. Halse C, Honey A. Rethinking ethics review as institutional discourse. Qual Inq 2007;13:336-52.
12. Edwards S, Kirchin S, Huxtable R. Research ethics committees and paternalism. J Med Ethics 2004;30:88-91.
13. Groves T. Senior UK researchers campaign for sensible guidelines on regulating trials. BMJ 2009;339:b3671.
14. Dixon-Woods M, Angell E. Research involving adults who lack capacity: how have research ethics committees interpreted the requirements? J Med Ethics 2009;35:377-81.
15. Mental Capacity Act 2005. London: Stationery Office. http://www.opsi.gov.uk/ACTS/acts2005/ukpga_20050009_en_1 (accessed 6 Oct 2009).
16. General Medical Council. Making and Using Visual and Audio Recordings of Patients. London: General Medical Council, 2002.
17. Edwards D. Calling for help: introduction to the special issue. Res Lang Soc Interact 2007;40:1-8.
18. Kitzinger C, Kitzinger S. Talking with women and the value of conversation analysis. Br J Midwifery 2007;15:256-64.
19. Shaw S, Petchey R, Chapman J, et al. A double-edged sword? Health research and research governance in UK primary care. Soc Sci Med 2008;68:912-18.
20. O'Neill O. Autonomy and Trust in Bioethics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2002:118-41.
21. Forssen A, Meland E, Hetlevik I, et al. Rethinking scientific responsibility. J Med Ethics 2011;37:299-302.