Introducing “ERIC”, a living research ethics database
Research ethics committees (RECs) in the UK are under criticism for inconsistency in both process and opinion. As chairmen of a multicentre REC and a local REC, we felt that one possible reason was the lack of convenient, up to date guidance for chairmen, administrators, and members.We recognised th...
| Authors: | ; |
|---|---|
| Format: | Electronic Article |
| Language: | English |
| Check availability: | HBZ Gateway |
| Journals Online & Print: | Drawer...
|
| Fernleihe: | Fernleihe für die Fachinformationsdienste |
| Published: |
BMJ Publ.
2003
|
| In: |
Journal of medical ethics
Year: 2003, Volume: 29, Issue: 2, Pages: 117 |
| Online Access: |
Volltext (JSTOR) Volltext (kostenfrei) Volltext (kostenfrei) |
| Summary: | Research ethics committees (RECs) in the UK are under criticism for inconsistency in both process and opinion. As chairmen of a multicentre REC and a local REC, we felt that one possible reason was the lack of convenient, up to date guidance for chairmen, administrators, and members.We recognised that there is no shortage of material for REC members to read but it is time consuming to access and difficult to apply to questions raised by review of research projects. International bodies have produced guidance; political organisations and governments have laid down … |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 1473-4257 |
| Contains: | Enthalten in: Journal of medical ethics
|
| Persistent identifiers: | DOI: 10.1136/jme.29.2.117 |