Understanding bureaucracy in health science ethics: toward a better institutional review board.
Where this comes from
- Record sourced from PubMed, PMID 19608947.
- Also identified by DOI 10.2105/AJPH.2008.152389 and PMC identifier 2724460.
- No licence information is recorded for this record.
- Because redistribution is not established, this page shows the abstract only. Follow the links below for the full text.
Abstract
Research involving human participants continues to grow dramatically, fueled by advances in medical technology, globalization of research, and financial and professional incentives. This creates increasing opportunities for ethical errors with devastating effects. The typical professional and policy response to calamities involving human participants in research is to layer on more ethical guidelines or strictures. We used a recent case-the Johns Hopkins University/Kennedy Kreiger Institute Lead Paint Study-to examine lessons learned since the Tuskegee Syphilis Study about the role of institutionalized science ethics in the protection of human participants in research. We address the role of the institutional review board as the focal point for policy attention.
Medical subject headings
- Biomedical Research
- Ethics Committees, Research
- Human Experimentation