Download PDFPDF

Trust and the Goldacre Review: why trusted research environments are not about trust
Compose Response

Plain text

  • No HTML tags allowed.
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.
Author Information
First or given name, e.g. 'Peter'.
Your last, or family, name, e.g. 'MacMoody'.
Your email address, e.g.
Your role and/or occupation, e.g. 'Orthopedic Surgeon'.
Your organization or institution (if applicable), e.g. 'Royal Free Hospital'.
Statement of Competing Interests


  • A rapid response is a moderated but not peer reviewed online response to a published article in a BMJ journal; it will not receive a DOI and will not be indexed unless it is also republished as a Letter, Correspondence or as other content. Find out more about rapid responses.
  • We intend to post all responses which are approved by the Editor, within 14 days (BMJ Journals) or 24 hours (The BMJ), however timeframes cannot be guaranteed. Responses must comply with our requirements and should contribute substantially to the topic, but it is at our absolute discretion whether we publish a response, and we reserve the right to edit or remove responses before and after publication and also republish some or all in other BMJ publications, including third party local editions in other countries and languages
  • Our requirements are stated in our rapid response terms and conditions and must be read. These include ensuring that: i) you do not include any illustrative content including tables and graphs, ii) you do not include any information that includes specifics about any patients,iii) you do not include any original data, unless it has already been published in a peer reviewed journal and you have included a reference, iv) your response is lawful, not defamatory, original and accurate, v) you declare any competing interests, vi) you understand that your name and other personal details set out in our rapid response terms and conditions will be published with any responses we publish and vii) you understand that once a response is published, we may continue to publish your response and/or edit or remove it in the future.
  • By submitting this rapid response you are agreeing to our terms and conditions for rapid responses and understand that your personal data will be processed in accordance with those terms and our privacy notice.
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.

Vertical Tabs

Other responses

Jump to comment:

  • Published on:
    Trust, Review, Response and Ethical control
    • hinpetch daungsupawong, academic consultant private academic consultant, Laos
    • Other Contributors:
      • viroj wiwanitkit, medical professor

    Trust, Review, Response and Ethical control
    Hinpetch Daungsupawong1; Viroj Wiwanitkit2
    1. Private Academic Consultant, Phonhong, Lao People's Democratic Republic ORCID: 0009-0002-5881-2709
    2. Adjunct professor, Chandigarh University, India ORCID 0000-0003-1039-3728 Correspondence
    Hinpetch Daungsupawong
    Private Academic Consultant, Phonhong, Lao People's Democratic Republic
    Post Publication correspondence Professor Viroj Wiwanitkit Chandigarh University, India Eamil:
    Authors’ contribution
    HD 50 % ideas, writing, analyzing, approval
    VW 50 % ideas, supervision, approval Page 2 of 6 Journal of Medical Ethics

    Conflict of interest : Authors declare no conflict of interest
    Acknowledgement: none

    Dear Editor, the article “Trust and the Goldacre Review: why trusted research environments are not about trust” give many concerns in the current practice [1]. The article highlights the significance of trust and trustworthiness in the exchange of health data. It emphasizes the importance of carefully considering where confidence is appropriate and desirable in different elements of data sharing, such as people, institutions, and data platforms. Because of the complexiti...

    Show More
    Conflict of Interest:
    None declared.
  • Published on:
    Trust is dead, long live trust
    • Hugh Davies, Chair of a Research Ethics Committrr Oxford A REC

    I had difficulty with the Goldacre report, when it starts with the apparent contradiction of dismissing trust (in no uncertain terms). yet then proposing these TREs. (Trusted research environments). Where do the authors actually stand?

    Conflict of Interest:
    None declared.