Human Experimentation Committees: Professional or Representative?
1975; Wiley; Volume: 5; Issue: 5 Linguagem: Inglês
10.2307/3561227
ISSN1552-146X
Autores Tópico(s)Science, Research, and Medicine
ResumoA dvisory and other review committees have emerged in the last decade as a major force in the scientific enterprise. Critics plead for increasingly stringent and inclusive review mechanisms while researchers see scientific progress grinding to a halt as ift' someone had deliberately set out to destroy all major research efforts. Human experimentation committees or committees to protect human subjects are particularly critical as a case study, first because they are by far the most massive example. As of January 1, 1975, 569 local review committees have tiled general assurances with the National Institutes of' Health, Division of' Research Grants. Thousands of other committees functioning under requirements for special assurances for the National Institutes of Health, as subcommittees, or as boards not directly related to the federal government requirements make the sheer size of' the movement an important case study. A second, more theoretical feature of the committees also makes their study important. As an effort to bring interdisciplinary professionals and laymen into the scientific advisory and review process they are an intermediate case between two models of' the review
Referência(s)