Kent G
Northern General Hospital, Sheffield.
J Med Ethics. 1997 Jun;23(3):186-90. doi: 10.1136/jme.23.3.186.
It can be argued that the ethical conduct of research involves achieving a balance between the rights and needs of three parties-potential research participants, society, and researchers. Local Research Ethics Committees (LRECs) have a number of roles and functions in the research enterprise, but there have been some indications that LREC members, researchers and the public can have different views about these responsibilities. Any such differences are potential sources of disagreement and misunderstanding.
To compare the views of LREC members, researchers and the public towards the roles and functions of LRECs.
A questionnaire that contained items concerned with a variety of such roles was distributed to general practice patients (as proxies for potential research participants), researchers and LREC members.
While general practice patients believed that the main function of LRECs is to ensure that research participants come to no harm, LREC members were more concerned with the protection of participants' rights. There was also some disagreement between members and researchers with regard to the consideration of proposals on the grounds of scientific merit.
Local Research Ethics Committee members need to be aware of potential differences in views, that they ought to make their priorities clear, and that membership of LRECs ought to reflect the views of both researchers and potential research participants.
可以说,研究的道德行为涉及在潜在研究参与者、社会和研究人员这三方的权利和需求之间取得平衡。地方研究伦理委员会(LRECs)在研究事业中具有多项作用和职能,但有迹象表明,伦理委员会成员、研究人员和公众对这些职责可能有不同看法。任何此类差异都是分歧和误解的潜在根源。
比较伦理委员会成员、研究人员和公众对伦理委员会作用和职能的看法。
向全科医疗患者(作为潜在研究参与者的代表)、研究人员和伦理委员会成员发放了一份包含各种此类作用相关条目的问卷。
虽然全科医疗患者认为伦理委员会的主要职能是确保研究参与者不受伤害,但伦理委员会成员更关注保护参与者的权利。在基于科学价值考虑提案方面,成员和研究人员之间也存在一些分歧。
地方研究伦理委员会成员需要意识到观点上的潜在差异,应明确其优先事项,并且伦理委员会的成员构成应反映研究人员和潜在研究参与者双方的观点。