Article info
PDFResearch ethics
Contesting the science/ethics distinction in the review of clinical research
- Correspondence to: Dr. Angus J Dawson Senior Lecturer in Ethics & Philosophy, Centre for Professional Ethics, Keele Hall, Keele University, Staffs, ST5 5BG. UK; a.j.dawson{at}keele.ac.uk
Citation
Contesting the science/ethics distinction in the review of clinical research
Publication history
- Received January 22, 2006
- Accepted February 28, 2006
- First published February 28, 2007.
Online issue publication
April 27, 2016
Request permissions
If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.
Copyright information
Copyright 2007 by the Journal of Medical Ethics
Other content recommended for you
- An analysis of decision letters by research ethics committees: the ethics/scientific quality boundary examined
- Proportional ethical review and the identification of ethical issues
- Should research ethics committees be told how to think?
- The experiences of ethics committee members: contradictions between individuals and committees
- The ESRC research ethics framework and research ethics review at UK universities: rebuilding the Tower of Babel REC by REC
- Ethics review of research: in pursuit of proportionality
- Efficiency and the proposed reforms to the NHS research ethics system
- Research ethics committees in Europe: implementing the directive, respecting diversity
- Strengthening ethics committees for health-related research in sub-Saharan Africa: a scoping review
- 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