Article Text
PDFResearch ethics
Should research ethics committees be told how to think?
Abstract
Research ethics committees (RECs) are charged with providing an opinion on whether research proposals are ethical. These committees are overseen by a central office that acts for the Department of Health and hence the State. An advisory group has recently reported back to the Department of Health, recommending that it should deal with (excessive) inconsistency in the decisions made by different RECs. This article questions the desirability and feasibility of questing for consistent ethical decisions.
Statistics from Altmetric.com
Footnotes
-
Competing interests: GMS chairs the Harrow Local Research Ethics Committee.
-
This article was adapted from material presented by GMS at a debate organised by COREC.
Read the full text or download the PDF:
Other content recommended for you
- Research ethics committees in Europe: implementing the directive, respecting diversity
- An analysis of decision letters by research ethics committees: the ethics/scientific quality boundary examined
- Is the NHS research ethics committees system to be outsourced to a low-cost offshore call centre? Reflections on human research ethics after the Warner Report
- Evaluation of the work of hospital districts’ research ethics committees in Finland
- Research ethics committees: the role of ethics in a regulatory authority
- Contesting the science/ethics distinction in the review of clinical research
- Another threat to research in the United Kingdom
- Problems and development strategies for research ethics committees in China’s higher education institutions
- Proportional ethical review and the identification of ethical issues
- NHS research ethics committees