Winkelmann Andreas, Heinze Anne-Kathrin, Hendrix Sven
Institute of Anatomy, Brandenburg Medical School, Neuruppin, Germany.
Institute of Vegetative Anatomy, Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Berlin, Germany.
Clin Anat. 2016 Jan;29(1):65-9. doi: 10.1002/ca.22650. Epub 2015 Nov 19.
Human cadaveric specimens are an important resource for research, particularly in biomechanical studies, but their use also raises ethical questions and cannot simply be taken for granted. It was asked how much information authors publishing musculoskeletal research actually give about such specimens and about how they were acquired. The aim was to formulate recommendations on how this reporting might be improved. Relevant articles published between 2009 and 2012 in four North American or European journals were scanned for information regarding the characteristics of the human specimens used, their institutional source and the ethical or legal context of their acquisition. While the majority of articles report biological characteristics of specimens (sex, age at death, preservation method), only 40% of articles refer to body donation, only 23% report the institution that provided specimens, and only 17% refer to some kind of formalized approval of their research. There were regional and journal-to-journal differences. No standard for reporting studies involving human specimens could be detected. It is suggested that such a standard be developed by researchers and editors. Information on the source of specimens and on the ethical or legal basis should be regularly reported to acknowledge this unique research resource and to preserve the good relationship between researchers and the communities, that provide the required specimens by body donation and upon which researchers depend.
人体尸体标本是研究的重要资源，特别是在生物力学研究中，但对其使用也引发了伦理问题，不能简单地视其为理所当然。有人提出，发表肌肉骨骼研究的作者实际上提供了多少关于此类标本及其获取方式的信息。目的是就如何改进这种报告方式制定建议。对2009年至2012年期间在北美或欧洲的四种期刊上发表的相关文章进行了扫描，以获取有关所用人标本的特征、其机构来源以及获取标本的伦理或法律背景的信息。虽然大多数文章报告了标本的生物学特征（性别、死亡年龄、保存方法），但只有40%的文章提及遗体捐赠，只有23%的文章报告了提供标本的机构，只有17%的文章提及对其研究的某种形式的批准。存在地区和期刊之间的差异。未发现涉及人体标本研究报告的标准。建议由研究人员和编辑制定这样一个标准。应定期报告标本来源以及伦理或法律依据的信息，以认可这种独特的研究资源，并维护研究人员与通过遗体捐赠提供所需标本的社区之间的良好关系，而研究人员依赖这些社区。
