Valdez-Martinez Edith, Turnbull Bernardo, Garduño-Espinosa Juan, Porter John D H
Coordinación de Investigación en Salud, 4. Piso, bloque B de la Unidad de Congresos del Centro Médico Nacional Siglo XXI, Instituto Mexicano del Seguro Social, Avenida Cuauhtemoc 330, Colonia Doctores. C.P. 06020, Mexico, D.F. Mexico.
Dev World Bioeth. 2006 May;6(2):95-105. doi: 10.1111/j.1471-8847.2006.00144.x.
To describe how local research ethics committees (LRECs) consider and apply research ethics in the evaluation of biomedical research proposals.
A qualitative study was conducted using purposeful sampling, focus groups and a grounded theory approach to generate data and to analyse the work of the LRECs.
11 LRECs of the Mexican Institute of Social Security (IMSS).
LRECs considered ethics to be implicit in all types of research, but that ethics reviews were only necessary for projects that included the direct participation of human beings. The LRECs appeared to understand the importance of consent, as in the completion of a consent form, but did not emphasise the importance of the process of acquiring 'informed' consent. The committees considered their main roles or functions to be: (a) to improve the methodological quality of research and to verify - if applicable - the ethical aspects; (b) to encourage personnel to undergo research training; (c) to follow-up research to oversee the adherence to norms and compliance with a specified research timetable.
This study provides a valuable insight into how these LRECs understand the ethical review process. The emphasis of the committees was on rules, regulations, improving research methodology and research training, rather than a focus on efforts to protect the rights and well being of research subjects. The results encourage further normative and descriptive lines of investigation concerning education and the development of LRECs.
描述地方研究伦理委员会(LRECs)在评估生物医学研究提案时如何考虑和应用研究伦理。
采用目的抽样、焦点小组和扎根理论方法进行定性研究,以生成数据并分析LRECs的工作。
墨西哥社会保障局(IMSS)的11个LRECs。
LRECs认为伦理在所有类型的研究中都是隐含的,但伦理审查仅对包括人类直接参与的项目是必要的。LRECs似乎理解同意的重要性,如在签署同意书时,但没有强调获得“知情”同意过程的重要性。委员会认为其主要作用或职能是:(a)提高研究的方法学质量并在适用时核实伦理方面;(b)鼓励人员接受研究培训;(c)对研究进行跟进,以监督是否遵守规范和特定的研究时间表。
本研究为这些LRECs如何理解伦理审查过程提供了有价值的见解。委员会的重点在于规则、条例、改进研究方法和研究培训,而不是专注于保护研究对象的权利和福祉。研究结果鼓励就LRECs的教育和发展开展进一步的规范性和描述性调查。