Guillemin Marilys, Gillam Lynn, Rosenthal Doreen, Bolitho Annie
University of Melbourne, Australia.
J Empir Res Hum Res Ethics. 2012 Jul;7(3):38-49. doi: 10.1525/jer.2012.7.3.38.
Considerable time and resources are invested in the ethics review process. We present qualitative data on how human research ethics committee members and health researchers perceive the role and function of the committee. The findings are based on interviews with 34 Australian ethics committee members and 54 health researchers. Although all participants agreed that the primary role of the ethics committee was to protect participants, there was disagreement regarding the additional roles undertaken by committees. Of particular concern were the perceptions from some ethics committee members and researchers that ethics committees were working to protect the institution's interests, as well as being overprotective toward research participants. This has the potential to lead to poor relations and mistrust between ethics committees and researchers.
大量的时间和资源投入到伦理审查过程中。我们提供了关于人类研究伦理委员会成员和健康研究人员如何看待委员会的角色和职能的定性数据。研究结果基于对34名澳大利亚伦理委员会成员和54名健康研究人员的访谈。尽管所有参与者都同意伦理委员会的主要作用是保护参与者，但对于委员会承担的其他作用存在分歧。特别令人担忧的是，一些伦理委员会成员和研究人员认为伦理委员会在努力保护机构的利益，同时对研究参与者过度保护。这有可能导致伦理委员会和研究人员之间关系不佳和不信任。
