Pieper Ian, Thomson Colin J H
Gold Coast Hospital and Health Service.
Monash Bioeth Rev. 2013 Mar;31(1):99-116. doi: 10.1007/BF03351345.
One of the core values to be applied by a body reviewing the ethics of human research is justice. The inclusion of justice as a requirement in the ethical review of human research is relatively recent and its utility had been largely unexamined until debates arose about the conduct of international biomedical research in the late 1990s. The subsequent amendment of authoritative documents in ways that appeared to shift the meaning of conceptions of justice generated a great deal of controversy. Another difficulty has been that both the theory and the substance of justice that are applied by researchers or reviewers can be frequently seen to be subjective. Both the concept of justice--hether distributive or commutative--and what counts as a just distribution or exchange--are given different weight and meanings by different people. In this paper, the origins and more recent debates about the requirement to consider justice as a criterion in the ethical review of human research are traced, relevant conceptions of justice are distinguished, and the manner in which they can be applied meaningfully in the ethical review of all human research is identified. We also explain the way that these concepts are articulated in, and the intent and function of, specific paragraphs of the National Statement on Ethical Conduct in Human Research (2007). The National Statement identifies a number of issues that should be considered when a human research ethics committee is reviewing the justice aspects of an application. We provide guidance to researchers as to how they can show that there is a fair distribution of burdens and benefits in the participant experience and the research outcomes. We also provide practical guidance to researches on how to think through issues of justice so that they can demonstrate that the design of their research projects meets this ethical requirement.
对人类研究伦理进行审查的机构所应秉持的核心价值观之一是公正。将公正作为人类研究伦理审查的一项要求相对较新,直到20世纪90年代末关于国际生物医学研究行为的辩论兴起,其效用在很大程度上都未得到审视。随后权威文件的修订似乎改变了公正概念的含义,引发了大量争议。另一个难题是,研究人员或审查者所应用的公正理论和实质内容常常被视为主观的。无论是分配公正还是交换公正的概念,以及什么算作公正的分配或交换,不同的人都赋予了不同的权重和含义。在本文中,追溯了将公正作为人类研究伦理审查标准这一要求的起源和近期的辩论,区分了相关的公正概念,并确定了它们能够在所有人类研究伦理审查中得到有意义应用的方式。我们还解释了这些概念在《人类研究伦理行为国家声明》(2007年)特定段落中的表述方式,以及这些段落的意图和功能。《国家声明》确定了人类研究伦理委员会在审查申请的公正方面时应考虑的一些问题。我们为研究人员提供指导,说明他们如何能够证明在参与者体验和研究成果中负担和利益得到了公平分配。我们还为研究人员提供实际指导,说明如何思考公正问题,以便他们能够证明其研究项目的设计符合这一伦理要求。