英国研究伦理审查体系及其启示

全面介绍了英国当前医学研究伦理审查体系与现行法规,总结其特色在于:建立了全国自上而下的中央化审查管理模式,独立于研究者、资助方、申办方以及开展研究的机构;分布在不同区域的各类别伦理委员会采用全国统一的标准操作规程运行;通过电子信息化系统统一受理全国的伦理申请;伦理审查采用与项目特点相称的审查形式,并关注公众参与及受试者权益保护等。结合国内现状,提出建立更全面的伦理监管体系并探索多样化的伦理审查形式。另外,医疗机构内应加强临床研究全流程管理,确保伦理委员会聚焦并围绕受试者权益保护,进行充分、有效的伦理审查。     

Polish Research Ethics Committees in the European Union System of Assessing Medical Experiments

The Polish equivalents of Research Ethics Committees are Bioethics Committees (BCs). A questionnaire study has been undertaken to determine their situation. The BC is usually comprised of 13 members. Nine of these are doctors and four are non-doctors. In 2006 BCs assessed an average of 27.3 ± 31.7 (range: 0–131) projects of clinical trials and 71.1 ± 139.8 (range: 0–638) projects of other types of medical research. During one BC meeting an average of 10.3 ± 14.7 (range: 0–71) projects of medical research were assessed (2006). The amendment of Polish laws according with Directive 2001/20/EC caused a percentage increase in BCs which assessed less than 20 projects per year (16% vs. 33% or 42% in 2003 vs. 2005 or 2006 respectively, p < 0,05). The results confirm the usefulness of the current practice of creating BCs by medical universities, medical institutes and regional chambers of physicians and dentists but rationalization of the workload for individual BCs is necessary.

Neglected Ends: Clinical Ethics Consultation and the Prospects for Closure

Clinical ethics consultations (CECs) are sometimes deemed complete at the moment when the consultants make a recommendation. In CECs that involve actual ethical conflict, this view of a consult's endpoint runs the risk of overemphasizing the conflict's resolution at the expense of the consult's process, which can have deleterious effects on the various parties in the conflict. This overly narrow focus on reaching a decision or recommendation in consults that involve profound moral disagreement can result in two types of adverse, lingering sequelae: moral distress or negative moral emotions. The problem, succinctly named, is that such consults have insufficient “closure” for patients, families, and providers. To promote closure, and avoid the ills of moral distress and the moral emotions, I argue that CECs need to prioritize assisted conversation between the different stakeholders in these conflicts, what is often referred to as “bioethics mediation.”     

A Troubled Dance: Doing the Work of Research Ethics Review

The fast growing interest in the work of university ethics review boards is evident in the proliferation of research and literature in the area. This article focuses on a Research Ethics Board (REB) in the Canadian context. In-depth, open-ended interviews with REB members and findings from a qualitative study designed to examine the ethics review of school-based research are used to illustrate points raised in the paper. The author’s experiences as academic researcher, advisor to student researchers and a 3-year term as an REB member inform the discussion. Macro issues related to the general workings of the board (e.g., maintaining appropriate membership) and micro issues connected to individual REB members’ experiences of reviewing research applications are examined. The author’s goal is to contribute to a fastgrowing conversation related to the issues that influence university ethics review while drawing attention to the contribution that faculty members’ understandings of their work as REB members can make to that conversation.     

努力提高多中心临床研究的伦理审查质量

多中心临床合作研究是现代生物医学发展的必然要求,各方利益冲突,双重标准,缺乏独立性,人员素质不高,跟踪监督欠缺等导致的伦理审查质量参差不齐已成为一个重要的制约因素,建议采取切实的多方面的措施,保证科学性和伦理合理性,明确职责,协调发展,努力提高多中心临床研究的伦理审查质量。     

Four Roles of Ethical Theory in Clinical Ethics Consultation

When clinical ethics committee members discuss a complex ethical dilemma, what use do they have for normative ethical theories? Members without training in ethical theory may still contribute to a pointed and nuanced analysis. Nonetheless, the knowledge and use of ethical theories can play four important roles: aiding in the initial awareness and identification of the moral challenges, assisting in the analysis and argumentation, contributing to a sound process and dialogue, and inspiring an attitude of reflexivity. These four roles of ethical theory in clinical ethics consultation are described and their significance highlighted, while an example case is used as an illustration throughout.     

A Code of Ethics for Health Care Ethics Consultants: Journey to the Present and Implications for the Field

For decades a debate has played out in the literature about who bioethicists are, what they do, whether they can be considered professionals qua bioethicists, and, if so, what professional responsibilities they are called to uphold. Health care ethics consultants are bioethicists who work in health care settings. They have been seeking guidance documents that speak to their special relationships/duties toward those they serve. By approving a Code of Ethics and Professional Responsibilities for Health Care Ethics Consultants, the American Society for Bioethics and Humanities (ASBH) has moved the professionalization debate forward in a significant way. This first code of ethics focuses on individuals who provide health care ethics consultation (HCEC) in clinical settings. The evolution of the code's development, implications for the field of HCEC and bioethics, and considerations for future directions are presented here.     

健康医疗数据相关研究的伦理审查要点重构及其论证

健康医疗数据相关研究极大地拓展了传统生物医学研究的范畴,影响了医学研究的思路、方法和范式,也给伦理审查带来了新的挑战。从梳理国际伦理指南对健康医疗数据相关研究提出的要求出发,探讨此类研究当前的伦理审查现状及挑战,强调伦理审查不仅要关注风险获益比、知情同意程序、隐私保护措施这些核心问题,还需要以更加全面和深入的视角进行关注。同时,针对研究的科学价值和社会价值、研究目的的合理性和合法性、数据治理和数据管理要求、风险获益评估、知情同意模式创新以及研究团队资质等六个伦理审查要点进行重构和探讨。

     

临床研究结果发布的伦理审查辨析

《涉及人的生命科学和医学研究伦理审查办法》对于临床研究结果的发布提出了伦理审查和知情同意告知的要求。探讨临床研究的结果发布可以最大程度实现临床研究的价值,包括有利于实现临床研究的透明性,有利于增强公众的信赖,有利于落实研究参与者的知情权,并分析了研究结果发布在隐私保护、发布形式、发布时间、科研诚信和学术不端方面带来的潜在伦理问题。建议伦理委员会从隐私风险最小化、发布形式规范化、发布时间合理化三方面进行伦理审查,同时给出了加强多部门协作和跟踪审查以及参与学术不端治理的伦理审查策略建议。

     

The Emergence of Clinical Research Ethics Consultation: Insights From a National Collaborative

The increasing complexity of human subjects research and its oversight has prompted researchers, as well as institutional review boards (IRBs), to have a forum in which to discuss challenging or novel ethical issues not fully addressed by regulations. Research ethics consultation (REC) services provide such a forum. In this article, we rely on the experiences of a national Research Ethics Consultation Collaborative that collected more than 350 research ethics consultations in a repository and published 18 challenging cases with accompanying ethical commentaries to highlight four contexts in which REC can be a valuable resource. REC assists: 1) investigators before and after the regulatory review; 2) investigators, IRBs, and other research administrators facing challenging and novel ethical issues; 3) IRBs and investigators with the increasing challenges of informed consent and risk/benefit analysis; and 4) in providing flexible and collaborative assistance to overcome study hurdles, mediate conflicts within a team, or directly engage with research participants. Institutions that have established, or plan to establish, REC services should work to raise the visibility of their service and engage in open communication with existing clinical ethics consult services as well as the IRB. While the IRB system remains the foundation for the ethical review of research, REC can be a valuable service for investigators, regulators, and research participants aligned with the goal of supporting ethical research.     

Medical Ethics Research Between Theory and Practice

The main object of criticism of present-day medical ethics is the standard view of the relationship between theory and practice. Medical ethics is more than the application of moral theories and principles, and health care is more than the domain of application of moral theories. Moral theories and principles are necessarily abstract, and therefore fail to take account of the sometimes idiosyncratic reality of clinical work and the actual experiences of practitioners. Suggestions to remedy the illnesses of contemporary medical ethics focus on re-establishing the connection between the internal and external morality of medicine. This article discusses the question how to develop a theoretical perspective on medical ethical issues that connects philosophical reflection with the everyday realities of medical practice. Four steps in a comprehensive approach of medical ethics research are distinguished: (1) examine health care contexts in order to obtain a better understanding of the internal morality of these practices; this requires empirical research; (2) analyze and interpret the external morality governing health care practices; sociological study of prevalent values, norms, and attitudes concerning medical-ethical issues is required; (3) creation of new theoretical perspectives on health care practices; Jensen's theory of healthcare practices will be useful here; (4) develop a new conception of bioethics that illuminates and clarifies the complex interaction between the internal and external morality of health care practices. Hermeneutical ethics can be helpful for integrating the experiences disclosed in the empirical ethical studies, as well as utilizing the insights gained from describing the value-contexts of health care practices. For a critical and normative perspective, hermeneutical ethics has to examine and explain the moral experiences uncovered, in order to understand what they tell us.     

医学科研与医学科研伦理的辩证思考

医学科研中出现许多伦理问题。其必然性在于科学与伦理的不同：即属性不同、评价标准不同、变革速度不同。医学伦理可以告诉人们什么样的医学科研活动是善的,什么样的科研行为是应该做的。医学科研中要把握医学伦理观,体现医学科技观,富有医学创新观。     

Students' Ethical Awareness and Conceptions of Research Ethics

The study focused on university students' understanding and conceptions of ethical issues in research. Domain-specific and domain-transcending measures were developed to gauge the students' awareness of ethical issues. Responses were obtained from 269 undergraduate and graduate students at a U.S. regional university. Participant withdrawal, the debriefing of research participants, the dissemination of findings, and giving credit to co-contributors were the most challenging ethical issues for the students. Ethical awareness was predicted by professional and organizational socialization, and perspective taking. Contextualization greatly improved the students' ability to recognize ethical issues. Simulations and role-taking are suggested as the means with which to teach students about the ethical issues perceived as challenging.     

Active SETI and the Problem of Research Ethics

This article argues that research involving active SETI, or sending messages toward possible extraterrestrial intelligence (METI), is not ethically justifiable. As a way of working some of the ethical problems associated with METI, I approach the sending of a message from the perspective that it represents a research endeavor involving sentient beings and therefore, should undergo review by a university institutional review board (IRB). As such, METI should be expected to meet several criteria expected by IRBs as being necessary components of ethically justifiable research. By considering issues of proportionality, justice, informed consent, the likely success of obtaining desired results, and necessity and considering risks and benefits to research subjects, as well as the mandate to do no harm, it is evident that METI does not meet the requirements for ethical research on human subjects and, thus, should not be considered ethical when it comes to nonhuman sentient beings.     

综合医院临床研究伦理初始审查常见问题及对策研究

为了探究综合医院临床研究的受试者权益是否得到有效保护,以某综合医院机构开展的临床研究项目伦理初始审查材料为例,进行了回顾性研究。选取2018年~2019年笔者所在医院开展的临床科研伦理审查项目存档资料进行评估。结果发现,在67项申请伦理审查的项目中,提出修改意见的项目占53.7%,其中知情同意书占47.8%;项目申请的主要问题集中于研究目的、研究内容和风险告知。研究方案设计的科学性、公平性、目的明确性、伦理合理性、风险告知充分等是研究者伦理意识和能力的关键。研究者和伦理委员会的工作能力仍需进一步提高以保护受试者的权益。     

The Regulation of Animal Research and the Emergence of Animal Ethics: A Conceptual History

The history of the regulation of animal research is essentially the history of the emergence of meaningful social ethics for animals in society. Initially, animal ethics concerned itself solely with cruelty, but this was seen as inadequate to late 20^th-century concerns about animal use. The new social ethic for animals was quite different, and its conceptual bases are explored in this paper. The Animal Welfare Act of 1966 represented a very minimal and in many ways incoherent attempt to regulate animal research, and is far from morally adequate. The 1985 amendments did much to render coherent the ethic for laboratory animals, but these standards were still inadequate in many ways, as enumerated here. The philosophy underlying these laws is explained, their main provisions are explored, and future directions that could move the ethic forward and further rationalize the laws are sketched.     

“学界热”与“行业冷”：医学伦理学落地医疗实践之思

医学伦理学是医学人文教育的基础阵地,中国过去40年医学伦理学科建设有成绩也有不足。当前医学伦理学落地医疗实践成为问题的焦点。从伦理学界的热点问题出发,描述热中有冷、冷热交加的伦理现象：应用伦理热、科研伦理热、医学伦理热,分析现象背后的原因可能是伦理观念与意识不足,理论与实践脱节及实践深度与广度不够。以此为基点寻生根之径,知的层面要自上而下多层保障;行的层面要理论联系实践,要深化内化转化;最终达到知行合一,入脑入心入行,加速医学伦理学落地生根。

     

Neuromarketing Research Practices: Attitudes,Ethics, and Behavioral Intentions

As a new addition to the marketing research toolbox, neuromarketing science has given rise to a variety of questions relevant to consumer perceptions of this nascent area of investigation. Neuromarketing researchers are dependent on consumer involvement as research participants, and finding means to educate the public about neuromarketing is a priority for professionals working in the field. This article describes the results of two online questionnaire studies focused on the role of personal constructs presumed to underlie perceptions of neuromarketing research. The findings point to neuromarketing research knowledge, attitudes toward science, attitudes toward technology, and ethical ideology as important factors linked to neuromarketing research attitudes, perceptions of the ethicality of neuromarketing research, and willingness to participate in neuromarketing studies. We discuss the implications of our findings for educating the public about neuromarketing research and encouraging research participation, and we conclude by suggesting directions for future research.     

Rethinking Research Ethics

Contemporary research ethics policies started with reflection on the atrocities perpetrated upoconcentration camp inmates by Nazi doctors. Apparently, as a consequence of that experience, the policies that now guide human subject research focus on the protection of human subjects by making informed consent the centerpiece of regulatory attention. I take the choice of context for policy design, the initial prioritization of informed consent, and several associated conceptual missteps, to have set research ethics off in the wrong direction. The aim of this paper is to sort out these confusions and their implications and to offer instead a straightforward framework for considering the ethical conduct of human subject research. In the course of this discussion I clarify different senses of autonomy that have been confounded and present more intelligible justifications for informed consent. I also take issue with several of the now accepted dogmas that govern research ethics. These include: the primacy of informed consent, the protection of the vulnerable, the substitution of beneficence for research's social purpose, and the introduction of an untenable distinction between innovation and research.     

Punctuated Equilibrium,Moral Panics and the Ethics Review Process

A review of the literature and ethnographic data from Australia, Canada, New Zealand, the United States, and the United Kingdom on the research ethics review process suggest that moral panics can become triggers for punctuated equilibrium in the review process at both the macro and microlevel, albeit with significantly different levels of magnitude and impact. These data suggest that neither the development of the ethics review process nor the process itself proceeds gradually, but both are characterized by periodic major shifts evoked by particular events or situations that result in varying levels of moral panic. One way to deal with this moral panic is to increase the regulation of research and the depth or intensity of the scrutiny of applications under ethics review. Moral panics at the macrolevel influence those at the microlevel and, if the moral panic evoked at the local or microlevel is not satisfactorily resolved, it will evoke action at a higher level. Understanding the evolution of research ethics review processes from this perspective might help make actions by ethics committees and policy makers more understandable and help explain why attention to research ethics are heightened at particular points in time. It may also provide a basis for developing recommendations for adaptations to the ethics review process and policy at both the local and macrolevel.