Reviewing the reviewers the vague accountability of research ethics committees 英文参考文献.docVIP

下载本文档

2
0
约1.32万字
约 3页
2017-05-13 发布于上海
举报
版权申诉

Reviewing the reviewers the vague accountability of research ethics committees 英文参考文献.doc

1、原创力文档（book118）网站文档一经付费（服务费），不意味着购买了该文档的版权，仅供个人/单位学习、研究之用，不得用于商业用途，未经授权，严禁复制、发行、汇编、翻译或者网络传播等，侵权必究。。
2、本站所有内容均由合作方或网友上传，本站不对文档的完整性、权威性及其观点立场正确性做任何保证或承诺！文档内容仅供研究参考，付费前请自行鉴别。如您付费，意味着您自己接受本站规则且自行承担风险，本站不退款、不进行额外附加服务；查看《如何避免下载的几个坑》。如果您已付费下载过本站文档，您可以点击这里二次下载。
3、如文档侵犯商业秘密、侵犯著作权、侵犯人身权等，请点击“版权申诉”（推荐），也可以打举报电话：400-050-0827(电话支持时间：9:00-18:30)。
4、该文档为VIP文档，如果想要下载，成为VIP会员后，下载免费。
5、成为VIP后，下载本文档将扣除1次下载权益。下载后，不支持退款、换文档。如有疑问请联系我们。
6、成为VIP后，您将拥有八大权益，权益包括：VIP文档下载权益、阅读免打扰、文档格式转换、高级专利检索、专属身份标志、高级客服、多端互通、版权登记。
7、VIP文档为合作方或网友上传，每下载1次，网站将根据用户上传文档的质量评分、类型等，对文档贡献者给予高额补贴、流量扶持。如果你也想贡献VIP文档。上传文档

Reviewing the reviewers the vague accountability of research ethics committees 英文参考文献

Available online /content/6/2/121 Commentary Reviewing the reviewers: the vague accountability of research ethics committees Randi Zlotnik Shaul Bioethicist, Department of Bioethics, The Hospital for Sick Children, and Department of Paediatrics and Joint Centre for Bioethics, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada Correspondence: Randi Zlotnik Shaul, r.zlotnik.shaul@utoronto.ca Published online: 11 March 2002 Critical Care 2002, 6:121-122 ? 2002 BioMed Central Ltd (Print ISSN 1364-8535; Online ISSN 1466-609X) Abstract The role of research ethics committees (RECs) is currently strained by increases in the number of protocols that are in need of review, the scientific and funding complexities of the protocols, and a lack of clear standards for ethics assessment. This commentary describes the significance of these strains and calls for clarification of reviewer accountability. To maintain or, in many cases, to restore public and professional trust in the ethics of human research and in REC review of protocols, it is imperative that steps be taken to clarify the accountability of RECs and their individual members. Keywords clinical trial, institutional review board, professional ethics, research ethics, research ethics committee Although the need to review the ethics of research studies, in which the welfare of participants was sacrificed to competing interests of the investigators (for reviews of cases see Katz [4], Jones [5] and Weijer [6]). In recent years, even in some of the world’s most prestigious research centres there have been many examples of noncompliance with ethical principles, resulting in preventable serious adverse events and inappropriate recruiting of subjects [7]. conducted in humans is generally accepted, there is less agreement over the extent to which reviewers are responsible or answerable for the decisions they make. What is the nature of reviewer accountability? RECs, like their US and Canadian count