Gilbert C, Fulford K W, Parker C
Ian Ramsey Centre, St. Cross College, Oxford.
BMJ. 1989 Dec 9;299(6713):1437-9. doi: 10.1136/bmj.299.6713.1437.
A survey of ethics committees in district health authorities was carried out to find out the size and make up of committees and what information and guidance they offered to scientists who apply to do research. A sample (n = 28) of committees in England (n = 190), half from teaching districts and half from non-teaching districts, was contacted by post requesting this information. A high degree of diversity was found, not only in the methods that committees used but also in the ethical criteria each considered to be pertinent for research. It was also shown that published guidelines have made little impact. It is suggested that issuing more guidelines will be of limited use. Rather, the following are needed: information about why guidelines have been widely ignored, better communication between committees, some form of education for committee members, and a formal register of committees compiled.
对地区卫生当局的伦理委员会进行了一项调查,以了解委员会的规模和组成,以及它们向申请开展研究的科学家提供了哪些信息和指导。通过邮寄方式联系了英格兰190个委员会中的一个样本(n = 28),其中一半来自教学区,一半来自非教学区,索要这些信息。结果发现,不仅各委员会使用的方法存在高度差异,而且每个委员会认为与研究相关的伦理标准也各不相同。研究还表明,已发布的指南几乎没有产生影响。有人认为,发布更多指南的作用将很有限。相反,需要以下几点:了解指南被广泛忽视的原因的信息、委员会之间更好的沟通、针对委员会成员的某种形式的教育,以及编制委员会的正式登记册。