Switch to: References

Add citations

You must login to add citations.
  1. Data Access Committees.Jan Piasecki & Phaik Yeong Cheah - 2020 - BMC Medical Ethics 21 (1):1-8.
    BackgroundSharing de-identified individual-level health research data is widely promoted and has many potential benefits. However there are also some potential harms, such as misuse of data and breach of participant confidentiality. One way to promote the benefits of sharing while ameliorating its potential harms is through the adoption of a managed access approach where data requests are channeled through a Data Access Committee (DAC), rather than making data openly available without restrictions. A DAC, whether a formal or informal group of (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   6 citations  
  • The ‘ethics committee’ job is administrative: a response to commentaries.Andrew John Moore - 2018 - Journal of Medical Ethics 44 (7):495-496.
    What job should authorities give to review boards? We are grateful to Soren Holm, Rosamond Rhodes, Julian Savulescu and G Owen Schaefer for their thoughtful commentaries on our answer.1–4 Here we add to the discussion. Let us summarise the claims for which we argued.5 Relevant authorities can task boards with review for consistency with duly established code, thereby making code-consistent activities apt for approval and code-inconsistent activities apt for rejection. They can instead task boards with review for ethical acceptability, making (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation