Article Text
PDFCommentary
The structure of ethics review: expert ethics committees and the challenge of voluntary research euthanasia
Statistics from Altmetric.com
Footnotes
Competing interests None declared.
Provenance and peer review Commissioned; internally peer reviewed.
↵i Thanks to Tom Douglas for these points.
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:
Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://www.bmj.com/company/products-services/rights-and-licensing/
Linked Articles
- Feature article
- Commentary
Read the full text or download the PDF:
Other content recommended for you
- Research ethics committees: the role of ethics in a regulatory authority
- Education of ethics committee members: experiences from Croatia
- The current state of clinical ethics and healthcare ethics committees in Belgium
- Improving the Helsinki Declaration's guidance on research in incompetent subjects
- Acceptable risks and burdens for children in research without direct benefit: a systematic analysis of the decisions made by the Dutch Central Committee
- A cross-sectional survey to investigate community understanding of medical research ethics committees
- What is the role of ethics committees after Regulation (EU) 536/2014?
- Getting the justification for research ethics review right
- ‘The ethics approval took 20 months on a trial which was meant to help terminally ill cancer patients. In the end we had to send the funding back’: a survey of views on human research ethics reviews
- Implementation of the EU clinical trial regulation transforms the ethics committee systems and endangers ethical standards