Free Community Science and the Free Development of Science 英文参考文献.docVIP

  • 4
  • 0
  • 约9.49千字
  • 约 2页
  • 2017-05-11 发布于上海
  • 举报

Free Community Science and the Free Development of Science 英文参考文献.doc

Free Community Science and the Free Development of Science 英文参考文献

Open access, freely available online Correspondence Open Access to Trials Register trial data. I suggest that institutional review boards refuse to allow human experimentation unless the protocol is ?led in a central (online) repository. The primary data should also be required to be in the public domain (say, within 1–2 years after completion). Data obtained by appealing to altrusitic instincts, similar to money in public charities, are not proprietary information, nor can physicians cash out the trust of their patients. In reality, it is the pharmaceutical industry that stands to gain the most if data are made public as such data inform future research and help smaller, innovative companies avoid redundancy. Voluntarily sticking to higher standards of ethics will raise societal respect for the industry (currently being battered for greed) and attract a more talented workforce, and may even help the current efforts to reform the tort law.  Susanne McCabe I ?nd the arguments raised by the PLoS Medicine editors very useful [1] as I had not considered that a scienti?c community would tolerate barring access to registers of trials. It leaves huge gaps for exploitation by privileged groups. It is not only colleagues in research and allied professions who need access but the global community, including members of the public wherever they live, those who participate in trials and those who will be on the receiving end of their outcomes. The annual reports of research ethics committees (RECs) are supposedly in the public domain after approval by Strategic Health Authorities in the UK. But very few members of the public know of their existence or how to access them. Approaches to individual committees even now can meet with varied reactions, from suspicious, defensive, or hostile—reluctantly sending one report, quizzing as to which organisation the enquirer belongs to and why they should want one—to extremely welcoming of interest and discussion. The annual reports s

您可能关注的文档

文档评论(0)

1亿VIP精品文档

相关文档