Switch to: References

Add citations

You must login to add citations.
  1. The development and evolution of ethics review boards – Israel as a case study.Maya Peled-Raz, Yael Efron, Shay S. Tzafrir, Israel Doron & Guy Enosh - 2024 - Research Ethics 20 (3):490-513.
    Although well established in developed countries, Ethics review boards in the academia, and specifically for social and behavioral sciences (SBS) research, is a relatively new, and still a controversy inducing endeavor. This study explores the establishment and functioning of ERBs in Israeli academia, serving as a case study for the challenges and progress made in ensuring ethical research practices in non-medical related spheres. A purposeful sample of 46 participants was selected, comprising ERB current or past members and SBS researchers, who (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • Mission Creep or Mission Lapse? Scientific Review in Research Oversight.Margaret Waltz, Jill A. Fisher & Rebecca L. Walker - 2023 - AJOB Empirical Bioethics 14 (1):38-49.
    Background The ethical use both of human and non-human animals in research is predicated on the assumption that it is of a high quality and its projected benefits are more significant than the risks and harms imposed on subjects. Yet questions remain about whether and how IRBs and IACUCs should consider the scientific value of proposed research studies.Methods We draw upon 45 interviews with IRB and IACUC members and researchers with oversight experience about their perceptions of their own roles in (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  • Ethics review, reflective equilibrium and reflexivity.Julie Morton - 2022 - Nursing Ethics 29 (1):49-62.
    Background:Research Ethics Committees (RECs) or their equivalent review applications for prospective research with human participants. Reviewers use universally agreed principlesi to make decisions...
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  • Appraising Harm in Phase I Trials: Healthy Volunteers' Accounts of Adverse Events.Lisa McManus, Arlene Davis, Rebecca L. Forcier & Jill A. Fisher - 2019 - Journal of Law, Medicine and Ethics 47 (2):323-333.
    While risk of harm is an important focus for whether clinical research on humans can and should proceed, there is uncertainty about what constitutes harm to a trial participant. In Phase I trials on healthy volunteers, the purpose of the research is to document and measure safety concerns associated with investigational drugs, and participants are financially compensated for their enrollment in these studies. In this article, we investigate how characterizations of harm are narrated by healthy volunteers in the context of (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations