Switch to: References

Add citations

You must login to add citations.
  1. Ethical review boards are poor advocates for patient perspectives.Malin Masterton, Tobias Renberg, Mats G. Hansson & Sofia Kälvemark Sporrong - 2014 - Research Ethics 10 (3):169-181.
    In medical research, patients are increasingly recognized with ‘lay knowledge’ but their views are poorly researched. The study objective was to investigate patients’ attitudes to medical research. This is in comparison to lay and expert members on ethical review boards, as their task is to evaluate the risk−benefits of research, which are ultimately grounded in attitudes and values. From focus-group interviews with patients suffering from chronic inflammatory diseases, a postal questionnaire was developed and sent to patient members of the Swedish (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  • Principlism and the ethical appraisal of clinical trials.Eric M. Meslin, Heather J. Sutherland, James V. Lavery & James E. Till - 1995 - Bioethics 9 (4):399–418.
    For nearly two decades, the process of reviewing the ethical merit of research involving human subjects has been based on the application of principles initially described in the U.S. National Commission's Belmont Report, and later articulated more fully by Beauchamp and Childress in their Principles of Biomedical Ethics. Recently, the use of ethical principles for deliberating about moral problems in medicine and research, referred to in the pejorative sense as “principlism”, has come under scrutiny. In this paper we argue that (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  • Giving answers or raising questions?: the problematic role of institutional ethics committees.J. E. Fleetwood, R. M. Arnold & R. J. Baron - 1989 - Journal of Medical Ethics 15 (3):137-142.
    Institutional ethics committees (IECs) are part of a growing phenomenon in the American health care system. Although a major force driving hospitals to establish IECs is the desire to resolve difficult clinical dilemmas in a quick and systematic way, in this paper we argue that such a goal is naive and, to some extent, misguided. We assess the growing trend of these committees, analyse the theoretical assumptions underlying their establishment, and evaluate their strengths and shortcomings. We show how the 'medical (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   15 citations