Switch to: References

Add citations

You must login to add citations.
  1. Leveraging artificial intelligence to detect ethical concerns in medical research: a case study.Kannan Sridharan & Gowri Sivaramakrishnan - forthcoming - Journal of Medical Ethics.
    BackgroundInstitutional review boards (IRBs) have been criticised for delays in approvals for research proposals due to inadequate or inexperienced IRB staff. Artificial intelligence (AI), particularly large language models (LLMs), has significant potential to assist IRB members in a prompt and efficient reviewing process.MethodsFour LLMs were evaluated on whether they could identify potential ethical issues in seven validated case studies. The LLMs were prompted with queries related to the proposed eligibility criteria of the study participants, vulnerability issues, information to be disclosed (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • Measuring inconsistency in research ethics committee review.Samantha Trace & Simon Erik Kolstoe - 2017 - BMC Medical Ethics 18 (1):1-10.
    Background The review of human participant research by Research Ethics Committees or Institutional Review Boards is a complex multi-faceted process that cannot be reduced to an algorithm. However, this does not give RECs/ IRBs permission to be inconsistent in their specific requirements to researchers or in their final opinions. In England the Health Research Authority coordinates 67 committees, and has adopted a consistency improvement plan including a process called “Shared Ethical Debate” where multiple committees review the same project. Committee reviews (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   8 citations  
  • Identifying and addressing nonrational processes in REB ethical decision-making.Simon Nuttgens - 2021 - Research Ethics 17 (3):328-345.
    Ethical decision-making is inherent to the research ethics committee deliberation process. While ethical codes, regulations, and research standards are indispensable in guiding this process,...
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  • Stakeholder views regarding ethical issues in the design and conduct of pragmatic trials: study protocol.Stuart G. Nicholls, Kelly Carroll, Jamie Brehaut, Charles Weijer, Spencer Phillips Hey, Cory E. Goldstein, Merrick Zwarenstein, Ian D. Graham, Joanne E. McKenzie, Lauralyn McIntyre, Vipul Jairath, Marion K. Campbell, Jeremy M. Grimshaw, Dean A. Fergusson & Monica Taljaard - 2018 - BMC Medical Ethics 19 (1):90.
    Randomized controlled trial trial designs exist on an explanatory-pragmatic spectrum, depending on the degree to which a study aims to address a question of efficacy or effectiveness. As conceptualized by Schwartz and Lellouch in 1967, an explanatory approach to trial design emphasizes hypothesis testing about the mechanisms of action of treatments under ideal conditions, whereas a pragmatic approach emphasizes testing effectiveness of two or more available treatments in real-world conditions. Interest in, and the number of, pragmatic trials has grown substantially (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  • Applying Genetic and Genomic Tools to Psychiatric Disorders: A Scoping Review.Ana S. IItis, Akaya Lewis, Sarah Neely, Stephannie Walker Seaton & Sarah H. Jeong - 2023 - HEC Forum 35 (3):293-308.
    Introduction The bioethics literature reflects significant interest in and concern with the use of genetic and genomic information in various settings. Because psychiatric treatment and research raises unique ethical, legal, and social issues, we conducted a scoping review of the biomedical, bioethics, and psychology literature regarding the application of genetic and genomic tools to psychiatric disorders (as listed in the DSM-5) and two associated behaviors or symptoms to provide a more detailed overview of the state of the field. Objectives The (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • Rethinking risk assessment for emerging technology first-in-human trials.Anna Genske & Sabrina Engel-Glatter - 2016 - Medicine, Health Care and Philosophy 19 (1):125-139.
    Recent progress in synthetic biology has enabled the development of novel therapeutic opportunities for the treatment of human disease. In the near future, first-in-human trials will be indicated. FIH trials mark a key milestone in the translation of medical SynBio applications into clinical practice. Fostered by uncertainty of possible adverse events for trial participants, a variety of ethical concerns emerge with regards to SynBio FIH trials, including ‘risk’ minimization. These concerns are associated with any FIH trial, however, due to the (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   3 citations  
  • Engaging key stakeholders to overcome barriers to studying the quality of research ethics oversight.Holly Fernandez Lynch, Swapnali Chaudhari, Brooke Cholka, Barbara E. Bierer, Megan Singleton, Jessica Rowe, Ann Johnson, Kimberley Serpico, Elisa A. Hurley & Emily E. Anderson - 2023 - Research Ethics 19 (1):62-77.
    The primary purpose of Institutional Review Boards (IRBs) is to protect the rights and welfare of human research participants. Evaluation and measurement of how IRBs satisfy this purpose and other important goals are open questions that demand empirical research. Research on IRBs, and the Human Research Protection Programs (HRPPs) of which they are often a part, is necessary to inform evidence-based practices, policies, and approaches to quality improvement in human research protections. However, to date, HRPP and IRB engagement in empirical (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  • Moving from the “Why” to the “How”: Two Approaches to Including Research Participants’ Voices.Stephanie Solomon Cargill - 2018 - IRB: Ethics & Human Research 40 (2):8-11.
    No categories
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • Research With Controlled Drugs: Why and Why Not? Response to Open Peer Commentaries on “An Ethical Exploration of Barriers to Research on Controlled Drugs”.Michael H. Andreae, Evelyn Rhodes, Tyler Bourgoise, George M. Carter, Robert S. White, Debbie Indyk, Henry Sacks & Rosamond Rhodes - 2016 - American Journal of Bioethics 16 (4):1-3.
    We examine the ethical, social, and regulatory barriers that may hinder research on therapeutic potential of certain controversial controlled substances like marijuana, heroin, or ketamine. Hazards for individuals and society and potential adverse effects on communities may be good reasons for limiting access and justify careful monitoring of these substances. Overly strict regulations, fear of legal consequences, stigma associated with abuse and populations using illicit drugs, and lack of funding may, however, limit research on their considerable therapeutic potential. We review (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation