医学研究伦理学的发展现状与前景

创新技术的开展和转化医学的注重给医学的发展注入了新的活力,但同时,也带来了一系列社会伦理问题和法律问题。生命医学伦理学的兴起和发展催生了医学研究伦理学分支学科形成,目的在于推进解决涉及人体的医学研究的伦理问题。当前,面临的最突出的伦理问题在于,对医学研究合法性、先进性及伦理性的把握,对医学研究伦理审查必要性的认知,对医学研究方案设计与伦理道德的匹配,对医学研究知情同意的告知,对医学研究风险与受益的平衡。逐步与国际接轨,加强伦理委员会制度建设;提高伦理审查能力建设,形成高水平的伦理审查队伍;学术组织和团体共同努力,推进医学研究伦理学的发展,这将助推医学研究伦理学的发展。     

涉及人的医学科研项目伦理审查实践体会

本文就国内涉及人的医学科研项目伦理审查现状进行了简要介绍,并结合武汉大学中南医院医学伦理委员会近年来伦理审查的工作实际,对涉及人的医学科研项目伦理审查中存在的共性问题进行了初步探讨,提出管理部门和伦理委员会应加强对研究人员伦理知识的宣传教育,加强科研项目伦理行为的过程监督,保护受试者权益,保证医学科研的健康发展。     

从医院等级评审谈医院伦理委员会建设

通过对照医院等级评审标准,阐述了评审标准对医院医学伦理学建设的相关要求,分析了医院伦理委员会建设中存在的问题,提出了推进医学伦理建设的建议。文章强调,推进伦理学教育,加强医德医风建设;严格伦理学督导,提高医疗科研水平;遵循伦理学原则,构建和谐的医患关系。     

法医遗传学研究和鉴定中的伦理问题

法医遗传学主要以人体生物检材为对象,通过检测遗传信息解决与法律相关的生物检材鉴识问题,为侦查提供线索,为审判提供证据,往往涉及到众多伦理问题。本文提出伦理学在法医遗传学研究和鉴定中的应用基本原则,并对检材/样本收集、法医DNA表型分析、法医遗传系谱学分析、法医DNA数据库建设和应用、亲子鉴定和亲缘鉴定、法医遗传学科研数据交流和共享等方面涉及的伦理问题进行了分析,提示法医遗传学从业人员在研究和鉴定中要充分考虑伦理问题,建议有关部门制定法医遗传学具体的伦理要求,建立伦理审查制度,加强从业人员伦理学培训。     

药物临床试验伦理审查存在的问题及对策研究

依据GCP药物临床试验管理规范,分析我国药物临床试验伦理审查工作中存在的问题,从如何保障受试者知情同意、加强伦理委员伦理知识培训、全程伦理监督及引入伦理验收、加强监管力度和完善监督体制等4个方面对药物临床试验伦理审查工作提出针对性建议,以逐步完善我国药物临床试验伦理审查工作。     

什么是生命伦理学？——从历史发展的视角

生命伦理学是20世纪60年代兴起于美国的一门新兴学科,旨在应对生命科学和生物技术的发展或医疗保健的演变使人类面临的种种伦理难题。生命伦理学的兴起有着特殊的社会历史背景。它在发展过程中出现的一些里程碑式的案例,对生命伦理学的发展产生了深远的影响。从其发展特征上看,生命伦理学和医学伦理学紧密联系,有着更为广泛的研究内容和独特的专业特性。生命伦理学要有效回应现代医学和生命科学的发展给人类带来的伦理难题,既要准确地界定伦理问题,又要以适当的方式将伦理学基础理论应用到具体问题当中。对生命伦理学的基本理论进行概述。     

我国药物临床试验伦理审查能力建设发展趋势

我国药物临床试验的深入广泛开展,促进了药物临床试验伦理审查水平的提高,伦理审查能力建设也取得了长足进步。但我国药物临床试验伦理审查能力建设面临系统的评估标准及体系、持续性培训和信息化程度缺乏等问题。加强药物临床试验伦理审查能力建设是我国医药领域进一步推进的重要工作,也是继续探索研究的热点内容及医学伦理审查工作者的自身需求。     

伦理与生活——走进中学生的生态伦理教育

生态伦理学是直接针对现代化的生产和科学技术的发展导致生态严重破坏的后果而提出来的,它是一门研究和调适人与自然的伦理及道德理念,规划和约束人对自然的伦理态度和道德行为的学科.生态伦理教育是实施可持续发展战略的必然选择;在青少年中开展生态伦理教育,可以为其成为“理性生态人”奠定基础.我国基础教育阶段存在着生态伦理教育不足的问题.生态伦理学是我校的一门校本课程.论述了生态伦理学教育的涵义、意义,并结合教学实践,介绍生态伦理教育在我校开展的情况.     

第三类医疗技术申报及管理的实践与探讨

自卫生部2009年3月印发《医疗技术临床应用管理办法》以来,卫生行政部门规范并加强了对医疗技术临床应用的准入和分级、分类管理。通过对第三类医疗技术的申报和后续管理的实践,对相关法律、法规缺位,从事该技术医疗技术人员动态管理,再评价综合管理模式以及伦理委员会审查等《医疗技术临床应用管理办法》中尚未明确规定的问题,提出探讨与对策。     

生态伦理学选修课“消费伦理”一节的教学设计

当今社会过度的消费造成了对人类长远发展的威胁。消费伦理就是要为人们的不合理消费行为设定必要的原则。在生态伦理学选修课"消费伦理"一节的教学中,利用相关视频、案例、资料等多种教学资源,充分组织学生进行深入讨论,使学生从生态伦理学角度充分认识个人消费与人类可持续发展的密切关系。     

Guidelines for Community-based Ethics Review of Children’s Science Fair Projects

Low-level community based ethics committees staffed by teachers, parents and community representatives can readily review children’s science fair projects subject to the revision of two core assumptions currently governing children’s Science Fairs. The first part of the paper recasts the New Zealand Royal Society guidelines from its primary emphasis on risk to a new assumption, without benefit there can be no risk. Equally, this revision gives more prominence to the participant information sheet, allowing it to act as a quasi application form which provides ethical transparency between student researchers, participants and a community based ethics committee. A second core assumption, more accurately labeled a cult of originality, produces a random, open-ended array of student topics taking ethics review beyond the confidence level of most community based ethics review committees. This paper reins in Science Fair coordinators recommending they make community level ethics review more manageable by providing a list of preapproved topics for those students wanting to conduct research involving human participants. These revised assumptions create a workable division of labour. Teachers’ preapproved topics involving human participants are more likely to be low risk, permitting community level ethics review to focus primarily on two aspects of the minimization of harm: first, for all participants, especially those with diminished autonomy, and second, for the child researchers themselves, as some participants may be unknown to the student. These revised assumptions make science and ethics more accessible to public education thus demonstrating how Science Fairs can lead students and the community into better understanding the role and function that ethics has in all scientific research human participants. Martin Tolich chaired New Zealand’s National Health Ethics committee, the multi-region ethics committee.     

Human Research Ethics Committees: Examining their Roles and Practices

considerable time and resources are invested in the ethics review process. We present qualitative data on how human research ethics committee members and health researchers perceive the role and function of the committee. The findings are based on interviews with 34 Australian ethics committee members and 54 health researchers. Although all participants agreed that the primary role of the ethics committee was to protect participants, there was disagreement regarding the additional roles undertaken by committees. Of particular concern were the perceptions from some ethics committee members and researchers that ethics committees were working to protect the institution's interests, as well as being overprotective toward research participants. This has the potential to lead to poor relations and mistrust between ethics committees and researchers.     

Challenges faced by research ethics committees in El Salvador: results from a focus group study

Objective:  To identify perceived barriers to capacity building for local research ethics oversight in El Salvador, and to set an agenda for international collaborative capacity building.
Methods:  Focus groups were formed in El Salvador which included 17 local clinical investigators and members of newly formed research ethics committees. Information about the proposed research was presented to participants during an international bioethics colloquium sponsored and organized by the St. Jude Children's Research Hospital in collaboration with the National Ethics Committee of El Salvador and the University of El Salvador. Interviews with the focus group participants were qualitatively analyzed.
Results:  Participants expressed the need to tailor the informed consent process and documentation to the local culture; for example, allowing family members to participate in decision-making, and employing shorter consent forms. Participants indicated that economic barriers often impede efforts in local capacity building. Participants valued international collaboration for mutual capacity building in research ethics oversight.
Conclusions:  Research ethics committees in El Salvador possess a basic knowledge of locally relevant ethical principles, though they need more training to optimize the application of bioethical principles and models to their particular contexts. Challenges increase the value of collaborative exchanges with ethics committee members in the United States. Further research on facilitating communication between host country and sponsor country ethics committees can maximize local research ethics expertise, and thus raise the standard of protecting human participants involved in international research.     

What is wrong with ethics review,the impact on teaching anthropology,and how to fix it: results of an empirical study

There is no empirical evidence that ethics review protects anthropologists’ research participants, but there is ample evidence that it is stifling research agendas and reshaping how we teach anthropological research methods, entrenching a positivist, clinical model of what constitutes research. This paper examines the impact of ethics review on student research in Australia, based on interviews conducted at 14 Australian universities. The data clearly show that the risks posed by student research are minor, and vastly overestimated by ethics committees. To avoid problems with ethics committees, we shepherd students into undertaking low‐risk, and consequently low‐impact, research. Many departments are abandoning research‐led teaching altogether because of the obstacle of ethics review. One solution would be to locate ethics discussions in disciplines and departments, radically restructuring the encounter to reconceptualise it as collegial debate about ethics dilemmas rather than ‘ethics review’.     

Two models of ethics committees

A distinction is made between two models of ethics committees. According to the Mirror Model, ethics committees ought to reflect the values of society. The Critical Model says committees are to critically examine these standards rather than merely reflect them. It is argued that the Critical Model should be accepted because a society's ethical standards can be mistaken and a society that has Critical rather than merely Mirror ethics committees is more likely to have such mistakes revealed. Some implications of the Critical Model are discussed.     

The new system of review by multicentre research ethics committees: prospective study

ObjectiveTo assess the function of the new system of review by multicentre research ethics committees and to highlight areas where improvement is still needed.DesignProspectively collected data from a multicentre study was examined with respect to the ethics review process. Administrative, financial, and time elements of the review process were audited.SettingA single multicentre research ethics committee and 125 local ethics committees from six regions of England.ResultsOnly 40% of local ethics committees considered our study in the manner specified in the 1998 directive. Less than a third of committees replied within the 21 day period stipulated, although committees acting by executive subcommittee replied more quickly than those not acting by executive subcommittee. There was a tendency for executive subcommittees to approve studies in a shorter time. Local ethics committees asked for a large number of non-local changes to the application. The financial cost of applying to multiple ethics committees remains high, mainly because multiple copies of research applications are being requested.ConclusionsThe new system of approval by multicentre research ethics committee for multicentre studies was introduced to reduce administrative costs, speed up the process of reviews by multiple research ethics committees, and standardise the conclusions of the local research ethics committees. Since its introduction an improvement has been seen, but the system is not yet universally functioning as intended. Ethics review still remains a hindrance to the financial resources and commencement of national studies. We strongly support the structure of review by multicentre research ethics committees but suggest that the system has yet to achieve its aims.     

Are research ethics committees behaving unethically? Some suggestions for improving performance and accountability.

The results of recent empirical investigations in research synthesis imply that research ethics committees are behaving unethically by endorsing new research which is unnecessary and by acquiescing in biased under-reporting of research which they have approved. The performance and accountability of research ethics committees would be improved if they required those proposing research to present systematic reviews of relevant previous research in support of their applications; to summarise the results of these reviews in the information prepared for potential participants; to register new controlled trials at inception; and to ensure that the results of these trials are made publicly available within a reasonable period of time after completion of data collection.     

Fate of biomedical research protocols and publication bias in France: retrospective cohort study

Objectives To describe the fate of protocols approved by the French research ethics committees, a national system created by the French 1988 Huriet-Sérusclat Act; to assess publication bias at a national level.Design Retrospective cohort study.Setting Representative sample of 25/48 French research ethics committees in 1994.Protocols 649 research protocols approved by committees, with follow-up information.Main outcome measures Protocols'' initial characteristics (design, study size, investigator) abstracted from committees'' archives; follow-up information (rates of initiation, completion, and publication) obtained from mailed questionnaire to principal investigators.Results Completed questionnaires were available for 649/976 (69%) protocols. Of these, 581 (90%) studies were initiated, 501/581 (86%) were completed, and 190/501 (38%) were published. Studies with confirmatory results were more likely to be published as scientific papers than were studies with inconclusive results (adjusted odds ratio 4.59, 95% confidence interval 2.21 to 9.54). Moreover, studies with confirmatory results were published more quickly than studies with inconclusive results (hazard ratio 2.48, 1.36 to 4.55).Conclusion At a national level, too many research studies are not completed, and among those completed too many are not published. We suggest capitalising on research ethics committees to register and follow all authorised research on human participants on a systematic and prospective basis.     

GENDER AND ETHICS COMMITTEES: WHERE’S THE ‘DIFFERENT VOICE’?

Prominent international and national ethics commissions such as the UNESCO International Bioethics Committee rarely achieve anything remotely resembling gender equality, although local research and clinical ethics committees are somewhat more egalitarian. Under‐representation of women is particularly troubling when the subject matter of modern bioethics so disproportionately concerns women’s bodies, and when such committees claim to derive ‘universal’ standards. Are women missing from many ethics committees because of relatively straightforward, if discriminatory, demographic factors? Or are the methods of analysis and styles of ethics to which these bodies are committed somehow ‘anti‐female’? It has been argued, for example, that there is a ‘different voice’ in ethical reasoning, not confined to women but more representative of female experience. Similarly, some feminist writers, such as Evelyn Fox Keller and Donna Haraway, have asked difficult epistemological questions about the dominant ‘masculine paradigm’ in science. Perhaps the dominant paradigm in ethics committee deliberation is similarly gendered? This article provides a preliminary survey of women’s representation on ethics committees in eastern and western Europe, a critical analysis of the supposed ‘masculinism’ of the principlist approach, and a case example in which a ‘different voice’ did indeed make a difference.     

Barriers and challenges in clinical ethics consultations: the experiences of nine clinical ethics committees

Clinical ethics committees have recently been established in nearly all Norwegian hospital trusts. One important task for these committees is clinical ethics consultations. This qualitative study explores significant barriers confronting the ethics committees in providing such consultation services. The interviews with the committees indicate that there is a substantial need for clinical ethics support services and, in general, the committee members expressed a great deal of enthusiasm for the committee work. They also reported, however, that tendencies to evade moral disagreement, conflict, and 'outsiders' are common in the hospitals. Sometimes even the committees comply with some of these tendencies. The committees agree that there is a need to improve their routines and procedures, clarify the committees' profile and field of responsibility, to make the committees well-known, to secure adequate operating conditions, and to develop organizational integration and support. Various strategies to meet these challenges on a local, regional or national level are also explored in this paper.