Cargando…

Reviewing the reviewers: the vague accountability of research ethics committees

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 s...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autor principal: Shaul, Randi Zlotnik
Formato: Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2002
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC137292/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11983036
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/cc1469
_version_ 1782120424489877504
author Shaul, Randi Zlotnik
author_facet Shaul, Randi Zlotnik
author_sort Shaul, Randi Zlotnik
collection PubMed
description 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.
format Text
id pubmed-137292
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2002
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-1372922003-02-27 Reviewing the reviewers: the vague accountability of research ethics committees Shaul, Randi Zlotnik Crit Care Commentary 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. BioMed Central 2002 2002-03-11 /pmc/articles/PMC137292/ /pubmed/11983036 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/cc1469 Text en Copyright © 2002 BioMed Central Ltd
spellingShingle Commentary
Shaul, Randi Zlotnik
Reviewing the reviewers: the vague accountability of research ethics committees
title Reviewing the reviewers: the vague accountability of research ethics committees
title_full Reviewing the reviewers: the vague accountability of research ethics committees
title_fullStr Reviewing the reviewers: the vague accountability of research ethics committees
title_full_unstemmed Reviewing the reviewers: the vague accountability of research ethics committees
title_short Reviewing the reviewers: the vague accountability of research ethics committees
title_sort reviewing the reviewers: the vague accountability of research ethics committees
topic Commentary
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC137292/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11983036
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/cc1469
work_keys_str_mv AT shaulrandizlotnik reviewingthereviewersthevagueaccountabilityofresearchethicscommittees