Burris Scott, Moss Kathryn
James E. Beasley School of Law Temple University.
J Empir Res Hum Res Ethics. 2006 Jun;1(2):39-58. doi: 10.1525/jer.2006.1.2.39.
VIRTUALLY ALL RESEARCH INVOLVING HUMAN subjects in the United States must be reviewed by an institutional review board, a form of research ethics review board. This article reports the results of qualitative research on how investigators regard this regulatory regime. Interviews were conducted with forty investigators conducting health-related research. Most respondents shared the regulations' goals, but doubted that the regulations, as implemented, promoted these goals efficiently, effectively and fairly. The interviews suggest that efforts to raise researchers' ethical consciousness have been, over time, quite successful, but that implementation of the regulations remains problematic. Research aimed at better defining the problem to be solved b y the r egulatory sy stem, and at a ssessing the effectiveness of the regulatory tools for solving properly defined problems, could guide a more productive debate about human subject protection.
在美国,几乎所有涉及人类受试者的研究都必须经过机构审查委员会的审查,这是一种研究伦理审查委员会。本文报告了关于研究者如何看待这一监管制度的定性研究结果。对40名从事健康相关研究的研究者进行了访谈。大多数受访者认同这些规定的目标,但怀疑这些规定在实施过程中能否高效、有效且公平地促进这些目标的实现。访谈表明,随着时间的推移,提高研究者伦理意识的努力相当成功,但规定的实施仍然存在问题。旨在更好地界定监管系统要解决的问题,并评估解决适当界定问题的监管工具的有效性的研究,可为关于人类受试者保护的更有成效的辩论提供指导。