Operational guidelines for ethics committees that review biomedical research

2019 ◽  
Vol 14 (2) ◽  
pp. 107-116 ◽  
Author(s):  
Blessing Silaigwana ◽  
Douglas Wassenaar

In South Africa, biomedical research cannot commence until it has been reviewed and approved by a local research ethics committee (REC). There remains a dearth of empirical data on the nature and frequency of ethical issues raised by such committees. This study sought to identify ethical concerns typically raised by two South African RECs. Meeting minutes for 180 protocols reviewed between 2009 and 2014 were coded and analyzed using a preexisting framework. Results showed that the most frequent queries involved informed consent, respect for participants, and scientific validity. Interestingly, administrative issues (non-ethical) such as missing researchers’ CVs and financial contracts emerged more frequently than ethical questions such as favorable risk/benefit ratio and fair participant selection. Although not generalizable to all RECs, our data provide insights into two South African RECs’ review concerns. More education and awareness of the actual ethical issues typically raised by such committees might help improve review outcomes and relationships between researchers and RECs.


2021 ◽  
Vol 2 (1) ◽  
pp. 100-105
Author(s):  
József Mandl

Összefoglaló. A klinikai orvosbiológiai vizsgálatok elkezdéséhez a kutatásban részt vevők biztonságát ellenőrző Egészségügyi Tudományos Tanács (ETT) kutatásetikai bizottságainak hozzájárulása szükséges. A járványt csak tudományos eredményekkel lehet legyőzni, ezért kitörésekor gyorsították a COVID–19 kutatási protokollok bírálatát. A koronavírus világjárvány szükségessé tett egy megváltozott kutatási adatkezelést is. A járványok megoldása a megelőzés. Bár a vírusellenes vakcinák adása hamar megkezdődött, ami jelentős tudományos teljesítmény, mégis tudományellenes hullám söpör végig a világon, és a kötelező védőoltások körüli jogi, etikai viták fellángoltak. Áltudományos érvelésekkel félrevezetnek embereket. Az ETT nemzeti kutatásfejlesztési programot javasolt a járvány következményeinek leküzdésére. Summary. Biomedical research activities are subjects to prior professional-ethical approval. ETT (the Medical Research Council in Hungary) through its research-ethics committees ensures the safety of people and protects their interests and health in various clinical investigations and trials. Thus, science, ethics, and safety cannot be separated in biomedical research. The ETT operates three national ethics committees. The opinions of ethical bodies are binding; clinical and biomedical research may not be initiated without the consent of the relevant ETT committees. This is in line with international regulations. The ETT has published the “Codex of Bioethics. On the concepts and practice of biomedical research” on its website. When the epidemic broke out, the ETT Presidency initiated immediate legislative changes that allowed for online meetings as well as digital consent to investigations, in addition to the previously exclusive personal ones. In the epidemic, time became the determining dimension, but this and the aim of the research could not be combined with such “lightening” that would endanger the safety and interests of the participants in the COVID studies. Thus, under the still strict requirements, the time for reviewing the COVID-19 protocols had to be radically shortened. However, the ETT research ethics committees also rejected submissions during the epidemic. A total of 171 COVID-19-related research protocols were approved in Hungary in 2020. The ETT Presidency initiated a national Research and Development program on infectious diseases, a call for scientific clinical R&D proposals on COVID-19, and also elaborated its priorities. Throughout human history, the solution to epidemics has always been to prevent the spread of disease through vaccinations. The average production time for traditional vaccines is about 15 years, whereas in the year of the SARS-CoV-2 virus pandemic outbreak, mass vaccinations began with completely new coronavirus vaccines partly made using brand new molecular biology technology that had never been used before. Despite the tremendous professional scientific achievements, a wave of hostilities is sweeping across the world, and the ethos and successes of science, and scientific communities in research are being questioned when their roles are dominant and outstanding. The concept of compulsory vaccination has been arguably classified as a human right. With this, the world of vaccinations was tied to concepts that it really had nothing to do with. Arbitrary pairing and joint treatment of remote concepts favours the spread of fatal diseases such as measles and poliomyelitis, for which there are already vaccines. Meanwhile, pseudosciences are misleading the public. The coronavirus pandemic has also necessitated changes in data management. The ETT has previously initiated a number of legal and professional proposals on health data management and access to research data, and has developed its own data protection rules following the introduction of the GDPR.


2011 ◽  
Vol 15 (05) ◽  
pp. 13-35 ◽  

Governance Framework for Biomedical Research in Singapore: A Risk-Based Account. Global Bioethics and New Evolutionary Challenges. Animal Experimentation: Right vs Rights. Bioethics - A Plethora of Perspectives. Clinical Ethics Committees in Western Europe: A Developmental Model for Asia. Bioethics: An Overview.


2017 ◽  
Vol 25 (2) ◽  
pp. 320-327
Author(s):  
Derrick E. Aarons

Abstract Risk and benefit assessment is one of the fundamental requirements in the ethical review of research involving human participants. As a result, researchers should evaluate and seek to minimize all foreseeable risks involved in their proposed research and members of research ethics committees should evaluate and balance the risks and potential benefits involved in each research proposal as a part of their ethical obligations regarding research protocols. However, current literature provides little detailed guidance on the specifics of how this balancing process should occur. Consequently, this article provides some details of the process to balance risks and benefits in biomedical research and reminds members of research ethics committees of their responsibility to protect those who are vulnerable from exploitation in research projects.


Author(s):  
G. T. Laurie ◽  
S. H. E. Harmon ◽  
E. S. Dove

This chapter discusses ethical and legal aspects of biomedical research. After highlighting the evolution and acceleration of rule-making in this setting, it differentiates between research and experimentation, and articulates a core regulatory concept, namely risk. It then covers ethical codes and legal instruments in human biomedical research, research ethics committees, randomised controlled trials, and experimental treatment, paying particular attention to informed consent and research involving people lacking capacity. It also addresses the unethical researcher, compensation for personal injury in research, research involving human tissue and personal data, and new approaches to research governance.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document