SAGE Journals Online
Advertisement
Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.

 

Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Advertisement

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
Scandinavian Journal of Public Health
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Right arrow Citing Articles via Scopus
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Lynöe, N.
Right arrow Articles by Jacobsson, L.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Lynöe, N.
Right arrow Articles by Jacobsson, L.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?

Research ethics committees: a comparative study of assessment of ethical dilemmas

Niels Lynöe

Department of Social Medicine

Mikael Sandlund

Department of Psychiatry, UmeÅ University, UmeÅ, Sweden

Lars Jacobsson

Department of Psychiatry, UmeÅ University, UmeÅ, Sweden

Research ethics committees (REC) constitute an important instrument for the regulation of biomedical research involving human beings. The purposes of this work were to study the ethical reasoning in RECs and to ascertain whether the composition of RECs has any bearing on the decisions subsequently made by them. We used a postal questionnaire, containing authentic cases of research ethical dilemmas, sent to the ten RECs in Sweden (n=124) and to comparison groups consisting of 200 randomly selected medical researchers, 200 randomly selected healthcare politicians and 200 randomly selected district nurses. The average response rate was 68%. A difference was found in how REC members assess a project in comparison with researchers, healthcare politicians and district nurses. Differences depended on the type of project assessed. The study indicates that membership in RECs may exert a normative influence on its members. It is proposed that this investigation should be followed up by a study with a qualitative design.

Key Words: empirical ethics • ethical reasoning • informed consent • research ethics committees.

Scandinavian Journal of Public Health, Vol. 27, No. 2, 152-159 (1999)
DOI: 10.1177/14034948990270020401
Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter    What's this?




Advertisement