Perspect Biol Med. 2020;63(2):262-276. doi: 10.1353/pbm.2020.0018.
This paper traces the reception of the Belmont Report in Europe and its influence on the development of European research ethics thinking and European research ethics systems. It is very difficult to trace a clear, linear reception history because it is difficult to disentangle the influence of the Report from the influence of concurrent developments, such as the 1975 revision of the World Medical Association Declaration of Helsinki and the requirement for research ethics review in the Vancouver Group's 1978 "Uniform Requirements for Manuscript Submission." The Report's insistence that the focus of research ethics should be the rights and interests of the individual research subject, and the use of an ethical framework and not ethical theory as the basis of analysis and justification of recommendations, were nevertheless very important for the development of research ethics. The divergence between Europe and the US in the governance of non-biomedical research can at least partly be explained by the absence of strong drivers for the introduction of research ethics committees outside of biomedicine in Europe, and by the ability of non-biomedical researchers to mobilize effectively against the introduction of such committees.
本文追溯了《贝尔蒙报告》在欧洲的接受情况及其对欧洲研究伦理思想和欧洲研究伦理体系发展的影响。由于很难将报告的影响与同时发生的其他发展（如 1975 年世界医学协会赫尔辛基宣言的修订和 1978 年温哥华小组“稿件提交统一要求”中对研究伦理审查的要求）区分开来，因此很难追踪到一个清晰的、线性的接受历史。报告坚持认为，研究伦理的重点应该是个体研究对象的权利和利益，并且使用伦理框架而不是伦理理论作为分析和证明建议的基础，这对于研究伦理的发展非常重要。欧洲和美国在非生物医学研究治理方面的分歧至少可以部分解释为，在欧洲，除了生物医学领域之外，没有强大的动力引入研究伦理委员会，而且非生物医学研究人员能够有效地动员起来反对引入此类委员会。
