Angell E, Tarrant C, Dixon-Woods M
Social Sciences Research Group, Department of Health Sciences, University of Leicester, Leicester, UK.
J Clin Pathol. 2009 Sep;62(9):825-9. doi: 10.1136/jcp.2008.060699.
Little is known about the types of issues research ethics committees (RECs) raise in their letters about research involving the storage and use of human tissue.
To classify the issues that appear to trouble RECs and to identify how the implementation of the Human Tissue (HT) Act in September 2006 might have affected REC decisions.
100 letters relating to applications about research use of human tissue were randomly selected from the National Research Ethics Service database, of which half were issued before the implementation of the HT Act and half post-implementation. Ethical issues raised by RECs were classified with a coding scheme developed using ethnographic content analysis.
Many letters raised issues about informed consent, including specific concerns about the information to be provided to participants about the taking, using and storing of their tissue samples. However, RECs appeared to be less likely to raise concerns about informed consent to use or store tissue after the HT Act, and there was some evidence that RECs were more comfortable allowing archived tissue samples to be used without additional patient consent after the HT Act than before.
In the wake of the HT Act, RECs do not appear to be more cautious about approving research to use or store tissue without consent when responding to applications for ethical approval. The HT Act has provided clarity and authority to RECs and may indeed facilitate the process of gaining ethical approval for tissue-based research.
对于研究伦理委员会(RECs)在涉及人体组织存储和使用的研究信件中提出的问题类型,人们了解甚少。
对似乎困扰研究伦理委员会的问题进行分类,并确定2006年9月《人体组织(HT)法案》的实施可能如何影响研究伦理委员会的决策。
从国家研究伦理服务数据库中随机抽取100封与人体组织研究使用申请相关的信件,其中一半在《人体组织法案》实施前发出,一半在实施后发出。研究伦理委员会提出的伦理问题采用人种学内容分析开发的编码方案进行分类。
许多信件提出了关于知情同意的问题,包括对向参与者提供的有关采集、使用和存储其组织样本信息的具体担忧。然而,在《人体组织法案》实施后,研究伦理委员会似乎不太可能对使用或存储组织的知情同意提出担忧,并且有一些证据表明,与之前相比,研究伦理委员会在《人体组织法案》实施后更愿意在无需额外患者同意的情况下允许使用存档的组织样本。
在《人体组织法案》之后,研究伦理委员会在回应伦理批准申请时,对于未经同意批准使用或存储组织的研究,似乎并未更加谨慎。《人体组织法案》为研究伦理委员会提供了明确性和权威性,确实可能有助于基于组织的研究获得伦理批准的过程。