Document Detail


Harmonisation of ethics committees' practice in 10 European countries.
MedLine Citation:
PMID:  19880708     Owner:  NLM     Status:  In-Process    
Abstract/OtherAbstract:
BACKGROUND: The Directive 2001/20/EC was an important first step towards consistency in the requirements and processes for clinical trials across Europe. However, by applying the same rules to all types of drug trials and transposing the Directive's principles into pre-existing national legislations, the Directive somewhat failed to meet its facilitation and harmonization targets. In the field of ethics, the Directive 2001/20/EC conditioned the way of understanding and transposing the "single opinion" process in each country. This led to a situation in which two models of research ethics committees organisation systems exist, being the model in which the "single opinion" is considered to be the decision made by a single ethics committee more effective and simpler in terms of administrative and logistic workload. METHOD: A survey was conducted in 10 European countries. Members of the European Clinical Research Infrastructures Network working party number 1, with expertise in the field of ethics, responded. RESULTS: There is a major heterogeneity in the composition of ethics committees among the surveyed countries based on the number of members, proportion of experts versus lay members and expertise of the scientific members. A harmonized education of the ethics committees' membership based in common curricula is recommended by the majority of countries. CONCLUSIONS: Despite the efforts for harmonization of the European Clinical Trial Directive, from an ethical point of view, there remains a plurality of ethics committees' systems in Europe. It is important to comprehend the individual national systems to understand the problems they are facing.
Authors:
R Hernandez; M Cooney; C Dualé; M Gálvez; S Gaynor; G Kardos; C Kubiak; S Mihaylov; J Pleiner; G Ruberto; N Sanz; M Skoog; P Souri; C O Stiller; A Strenge-Hesse; A Vas; D Winter; X Carné
Related Documents :
20338938 - Ethics committees for biomedical research in some african emerging countries: which est...
15820908 - Aps position statement on the use of placebos in pain management.
20084528 - Japanese consensus guidelines for management of autoimmune pancreatitis: i. concept and...
19843028 - The declaration of istanbul: review and commentary by the american society of transplan...
22330658 - Role of professional organizations in setting and enforcing ethical norms.
19793938 - Is it ethical for a general practitioner to claim a conscientious objection when asked ...
Publication Detail:
Type:  Journal Article; Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't    
Journal Detail:
Title:  Journal of medical ethics     Volume:  35     ISSN:  1473-4257     ISO Abbreviation:  J Med Ethics     Publication Date:  2009 Nov 
Date Detail:
Created Date:  2009-11-02     Completed Date:  -     Revised Date:  -    
Medline Journal Info:
Nlm Unique ID:  7513619     Medline TA:  J Med Ethics     Country:  England    
Other Details:
Languages:  eng     Pagination:  696-700     Citation Subset:  E; IM    
Affiliation:
Pharmacology Department, Hospital Clínic de Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain.
Export Citation:
APA/MLA Format     Download EndNote     Download BibTex
MeSH Terms
Descriptor/Qualifier:

From MEDLINE®/PubMed®, a database of the U.S. National Library of Medicine


Previous Document:  Solo doctors and ethical isolation.
Next Document:  The acceptability among French lay persons of ending the lives of damaged newborns.