Clinical Ethics 3 (2):85-90 (2008)

Michael Parker
Marquette University
The objective of this study is to describe researchers', health-care providers' and other stakeholders' views of ethical review and research governance procedures. The study design involved qualitative semi-structured interviews. Participants included 60 individuals who either undertook research in the subspecialty of cancer genetics (n = 40) or were involved in biomedical research in other capacities (n = 20), e.g. research governance and oversight, patient support groups or research funding. While all interviewees observed that oversight is necessary to protect research participants, ethical review and research governance (ERG) arrangements were described negatively throughout these interviews. Interviewees identified a number of problems with ERG, including: over-bureaucratization, over-standardization of information requirements for different types of research, a lack of standardization in the types of information required by different committees for the same research and a lack of consistency in different committees' responses. A number of solutions were proposed including streamlining application procedures and harmonizing committees' responses and information requirements. Recent reports suggest that ethical review procedures and research governance arrangements threaten the possibility of undertaking clinical research in the UK, hence the introduction of the Integrated Research Application System (IRAS) is long overdue. However, while IRAS may solve some of the problems identified by interviewees, it remains to be seen to what extent it will impact upon the very negative perceptions of ethics and research governance procedures reported here
Keywords No keywords specified (fix it)
Categories (categorize this paper)
DOI 10.1258/ce.2008.008014
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

PhilArchive copy

Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy     Papers currently archived: 69,114
External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
Through your library

References found in this work BETA

Delimiting the Concept of Research: An Ethical Perspective.Lisa Bortolotti & Bert Heinrichs - 2007 - Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics 28 (3):157-179.

Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

Add more citations

Similar books and articles

Bioethics at the Crossroad.Erich H. Loewy & Roberta Springer Loewy - 2001 - Health Care Analysis 9 (4):463-476.
Simplified Models of the Relationship Between Health and Disease.Bjørn Hofmann - 2005 - Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics 26 (5):355-377.
The Use of Human Tissue.Grant Gillett - 2007 - Journal of Bioethical Inquiry 4 (2):119-127.
'Role' as a Moral Concept in Health Care.N. E. Bowie - 1982 - Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 7 (1):57-64.
Health Risks and the Health Care Professional.Helen L. Treanor - 2000 - Medicine, Health Care and Philosophy 3 (3):251-254.


Added to PP index

Total views
55 ( #204,656 of 2,499,084 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
1 ( #419,059 of 2,499,084 )

How can I increase my downloads?


My notes