Article Text
Abstract
In their response to ‘Public interest in health data research: laying out the conceptual groundwork’, Grewal and Newson critique us for inattention to the law and putting forward an impracticably broad conceptual understanding of public interest. While we agree more work is needed to generate a workable framework for Institutional Review Boards/Research Ethics Committees (IRBs/RECs), we would contend that this should be grounded on a broad conception of public interest. This broadness facilitates regulatory agility, and is already reflected by some current frameworks such as that found in the guidelines approved under Australia’s Privacy Act. It remains unclear which elements of our broad account Grewal and Newson would reject, or indeed where the substantive disagreement with our position lies.
- research ethics
- ethics committees/consultation
- policy guidelines
- legal aspects
Statistics from Altmetric.com
Footnotes
Twitter @G_Owen_Schaefer
Contributors This paper was conceived by AB and GOS. AB wrote the initial draft. GOS and AB conducted redrafts and edits after discussion and mutual agreement. GOS and AB approved the final version.
Funding Ministry of Education – Singapore: Social Science Research Thematic Grant MOE2017-SS.
Competing interests None declared.
Patient consent for publication Not required.
Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; internally peer reviewed.
Linked Articles
Read the full text or download the PDF:
Other content recommended for you
- Public interest in health data research: laying out the conceptual groundwork
- The perils of a broad approach to public interest in health data research: a response to Ballantyne and Schaefer
- Consent and the ethical duty to participate in health data research
- Research or clinical care: what’s the difference?
- Taxonomy of justifications for consent waivers: When and why are public views relevant?
- Family history and adoption in the UK: conflicts of interest in medical disclosure
- Open government?
- Science, politics, ethics and the pandemic
- Public good, personal privacy: a citizens' deliberation about using medical information for pharmacoepidemiological research
- How should we think about clinical data ownership?