Research Ethics Boards: Error and Misconception
نویسنده
چکیده
Joal Hill I read with interest the debate about for-profi t versus non-profi t institutional review boards (IRBs) [1], but was disappointed that no one addressed the ability (or inability) of for-profi t IRBs to review studies with the local context of research subjects in mind and then monitor what actually occurs during the consent process throughout the research trial. To my mind the “bigness” of for-profi t IRBs may be more of an impediment in protecting research subjects than their inherent confl ict of interest. Our IRB has reviewed consent forms approved by central/for-profi t IRBs that contained obvious errors such as schemas that did not match protocol narrative and use of eight point font in a study of geriatric subjects. Even when the initial review is outstanding, it seems a practical impossibility for a single IRB to provide meaningful monitoring of the actual consent process and implementation of the protocol at sites throughout the country. The greater “effi ciency” of for-profi t IRBs is only a meaningful benefi t if increased speed can be shown not to occur at the expense of careful review of consent forms, real understanding of the local research context, and a commitment to audit the informed consent process throughout the study for the protection of research subjects, including ongoing education and advice for researchers and their teams. This is not to say that all local IRBs perform this function as they should, but it does seem almost impossible for one IRB to perform local review and oversight for research sites around the nation in a way that really makes a difference for the men, women, and children who give of their time and their bodies so that society can benefi t.
منابع مشابه
Beyond informed consent: the therapeutic misconception and trust.
The therapeutic misconception has been seen as presenting an ethical problem because failure to distinguish the aims of research participation from those receiving ordinary treatment may seriously undermine the informed consent of research subjects. Hence, most theoretical and empirical work on the problems of the therapeutic misconception has been directed to evaluate whether, and to what degr...
متن کاملThe therapeutic misconception at 25: treatment, research, and confusion.
"Therapeutic misconception" has been misconstrued, and some of the newer, mistaken interpretations are troublesome. They exaggerate the distinction between research and treatment revealing problems in the foundations of research ethics and possibly weakening informed consent.
متن کاملClarifying the ethics of clinical research: a path toward avoiding the therapeutic misconception.
متن کامل
Competent Authorities to Handle Complaints about Incorrect Tax Assessment and Collection with an Ethical Approach in Iran
Background: Retrial is an additional combination of the words "retrial" and "trial". Trial is a means of justice and trial, like others, is in the introduction of error and error if there is a verdict that is accompanied by error as a result of the trial. Which must be reconsidered. In the relations between taxpayers and the tax system, a dispute is possible, which can be due to factors such as...
متن کاملNanomedicine first-in-human research: challenges for informed consent.
Risks of harm, translational uncertainty, ambiguities in potential direct benefit, and long-term follow-up merit consideration in first-in-human research. Some nanomedical technologies have additional characteristics that should be addressed, including: defining and describing nanomedical interventions; bystander risks; the therapeutic misconception; and a decision-making context that includes ...
متن کاملذخیره در منابع من
با ذخیره ی این منبع در منابع من، دسترسی به آن را برای استفاده های بعدی آسان تر کنید
عنوان ژورنال:
- PLoS Medicine
دوره 3 شماره
صفحات -
تاریخ انتشار 2006