The principle of benefit from drug development for patients in clinical research

From an ethical perspective, clinical research involving humans is only acceptable if it involves the potential for benefit. Various characteristics can be applied to differentiate research benefit. Often benefit is categorized in direct or indirect benefit, whereby indirect benefit might be further differentiated in collective or benefit for the society, excluding or including the trial patient in the long term. Ethical guidelines, such as the Declaration of Helsinki in its latest version, do not precisely favor a particular type of benefit.

Guidelines and principles for pre-ethical approaches to Indigenous Australian research

In concert with AIATSIS’ Guidelines for Ethical Research in Australian Indigenous Studies 2012, these guidelines articulate the need for the researcher to position their own research from the outset, before any research takes place. The rationale of these guidelines are to protect the rights for Indigenous peoples whilst building a strong relational connection with participants of the research. Pre-‐ethic guidelines are necessary in order to bring to the foreground Indigenous knowledges and relationships premised on the needs, rights and aspirations of Indigenous peoples, communities and entities.

Ethical review in creative industries and other practice-based research

The processes used in Australian universities for reviewing the ethics of research projects are based on the traditions of research and practice from the medical and health sciences. The national guidelines for ethical conduct in research are heavily based on presumptions that the researcher–participant relationship is similar to a doctor–patient relationship. The National Health and Medical Research Council, Australian Research Council and Australian Vice-Chancellors’ Committee have made a laudable effort to fix this problem by releasing the National Statement on Ethical Conduct in Human Research in 2007, to replace the 1999 National Statement on Ethical Conduct in Research Involving Humans. The new statement better encompasses the needs of the humanities, social sciences and creative industries. However, this paper argues that the revised National Statement and ethical review processes within universities still do not fully encompass the definitions of ‘research’ and the requirements, traditions, codes of practice and standards of the humanities, social sciences and creative industries. The paper argues that scholars within these disciplines often lack the language to articulate their modes of practice and risk management strategies to university-level ethics committees. As a consequence, scholars from these disciplines may find their research is delayed or stymied. The paper focuses on creative industries researchers, and explores the issues that they face in managing the ethical review process, particularly when engaging in practice-based research. Although the focus is on the creative industries, the issues are relevant to most fields in the humanities and social sciences.

Can we do better? Researchers' experiences with ethical review boards on projects with later life as a focus

The goal of this study was to describe researchers' experiences in submitting ethical proposals focused on older adult populations, including studies with persons with dementia, to ethical review boards. Ethical approval was granted for an online survey. Researchers were recruited via listservs and snowballing techniques. Participants included 157 persons (73% female) from Australia and the United States, with a mean age of 46 (±13). Six main issues were encountered by researchers who participated in this survey. In descending order, these included questions regarding: informed consent and information requirements (61.1%), participants' vulnerability, particularly for those with cognitive impairments (58.6%), participant burden (44.6%), data access (29.3%), adverse effects of data collection/intervention (26.8%), and study methodology (25.5%). An inductive content analysis of responses revealed a range of encounters with ethical review panels spanning positive, negative, and neutral experiences. Concerns voiced about ethical review boards included committees being overly focused on legal risk, as well as not always hearing the voice of older research participants, both potential and actual. Respondents noted inability to move forward on studies, as well as loss of researchers and participant groups from gerontological and clinical research as a result of negative interactions with ethics committees. Positive interactions with the committees reinforced researchers' need to carefully construct their research approaches with persons with dementia in particular. Suggested guidelines for committees when dealing with ethics applications involving older adults include self-reflecting on potential biases and stereotypes, and seeking further clarification and information from gerontological researchers before arriving at decisions.

Desire for hastened death in patients with advanced disease and the evidence base of clinical guidelines:a systematic review

Patients' desire for hastened death within the context of advanced disease and palliative care is a controversial topic, frequently discussed in the international literature. Much of the discussion has focused on opinion and debate about ethical matters related to hastened death. Not many research studies seem to have specifically targeted why palliative care patients may desire hastened death, and few have focused on clinical guidelines for responding to such requests.

Ethical dilemmas for clinical psychologists in conducting qualitative research

Clinical psychologists often use qualitative methods to explore sensitive topics with vulnerable individuals, yet there has been little discussion of the specific ethical issues involved. For clinicians conducting qualitative research, there are likely to be ethical dilemmas associated with being both a researcher and a practitioner. We argue that this overarching issue frames all other ethical issues raised. This article provides an overview of the range of ethical issues that have been discussed in general in relation to qualitative research and considers the specific nature of these in relation to the discipline of clinical psychology. Such issues will be exemplified by reference to some of our own research and practice and the extant literature. We conclude with some suggestions for good practice, although our aim is to trigger debate rather than to establish prescriptive guidelines.

Retrospective research: What are the ethical and legal requirements?

Retrospective research is conducted on already available data and/or biologic material. Whether such research requires that patients specifically consent to the use of "their" data continues to stir controversy. From a legal and ethical point of view, it depends on several factors. The main criteria to be considered are whether the data or the sample is anonymous, whether the researcher is the one who collected it and whether the patient was told of the possible research use. In Switzerland, several laws delineate the procedure to be followed. The definition of "anonymous" is open to some interpretation. In addition, it is debatable whether consent waivers that are legally admissible for data extend to research involving human biological samples. In a few years, a new Swiss federal law on human research could clarify the regulatory landscape. Meanwhile, hospital-internal guidelines may impose stricter conditions than required by federal or cantonal law. Conversely, Swiss and European ethical texts may suggest greater flexibility and call for a looser interpretation of existing laws. The present article provides an overview of the issues for physicians, scientists, ethics committee members and policy makers involved in retrospective research in Switzerland. It aims at provoking more open discussions of the regulatory problems and possible future legal and ethical solutions.

Molecular autopsy in sudden cardiac death and its implication for families: discussion of the practical, legal and ethical aspects of the multidisciplinary collaboration.

Sudden cardiac death (SCD) is a major cause of premature death in young adults and children in developed countries. Standard forensic autopsy procedures are often unsuccessful in determining the cause of SCD. Post-mortem genetic testing, also called molecular autopsy, has revealed that a non-negligible number of these deaths are a result of inherited cardiac diseases, including arrhythmic disorders such as congenital long QT syndrome and Brugada syndrome. Due to the heritability of these diseases, the potential implications for living relatives must be taken into consideration. Advanced diagnostic analyses, genetic counselling, and interdisciplinary collaboration should be integral parts of clinical and forensic practice. In this article we present a multidisciplinary collaboration established in Lausanne, with the goal of properly informing families of these pathologies and their implications for surviving family members. In Switzerland, as in many other countries, legal guidelines for genetic testing do not address the use of molecular tools for post-mortem genetic analyses in forensic practice. In this article we present the standard practice guidelines established by our multidisciplinary team.

Ethical Dimensions in Paediatric Neurology: A Look into the Future

Les professionnels de la santé et les familles pour qui des enfants qui participent à la recherche en génétique ou qui nécessitent des services génétiques spécialisés, y compris, le dépistage génétique, seront confrontés à des interrogations non seulement médicales, mais sociales, éthiques et juridiques liées à la génétique en neurologie pédiatrique. Les enfants se retrouvent souvent au centre d’innovations dans le cadre de recherches en génétique et leurs besoins uniques soulèvent des inquiétudes quant aux risques et aux bénéfices associés à cette recherche. Plus précisément, le consentement, l’utilisation de base de données génétique et la thérapie génique soulèvent des enjeux particuliers. En plus de ces enjeux, des risques psychologiques peuvent aussi leur être associés. À la lumière de l’analyse de lignes directrices nationales et internationales, il sera question, dans cet article, des bénéfices et de l’impact des technologies génétiques chez l’enfant. Les médecins, les législateurs et les familles doivent être informés de ces lignes directrices et doivent comprendre les enjeux éthiques et psychologiques liés à la génétique en neurologie pédiatrique. // Health care providers and families with children who participate in genetic research or who need specialized genetic services, including genetic testing, will encounter not only medical but difficult social, ethical, and legal questions surrounding pediatric genetic neurology. Children are often at the center of much of the genetic revolution and their unique needs raise special concerns about the risks and the benefits associated with genetic research, particularly the issues of consent, the use of genetic databases, and gene therapy. Moreover, genetic research and testing raise important psychosocial risks. In this article we discuss some of the benefits and consequences of genetic technologies for children in relation to national and international guidelines. In particular, physicians, policy-makers, and families should be knowledgeable about the guidelines and have good understanding of the psychosocial and ethical issues associated with genetics in pediatric neurology.

Involving the Public in Public Health Genomics: A Review of Guidelines and Policy Statements

Public health genomics raises exciting possibilities for preventing or reducing the occurrence of both rare and common disease. However, this area of research raises challenging ethical, legal and social issues that must be addressed. One way of addressing these issues is through public involvement in the policy-making process. This GenEdit reviews how international guidelines and policy statements related to public health genomics address the issue of public involvement. Key areas of discussion are the values and goals justifying public involvement, the proposed activities to increase public involvement, who is / who represents "the public", and the projected outcomes of public involvement.

Guidelines for Reducing the Negative Public Health Impacts of Medical Tourism

Étude de cas / Case study

The ethical, social and environmental reporting-performance portrayal gap

The purpose of this article is twofold. First, it assesses in detail the extent to which corporate reporting on ethical, social and environmental issues reflects corporate performance in case study company Alpha. This “reporting-performance” portrayal gap is a key measure of the extent to which an organisation is accountable to its stakeholders. Alpha's disclosures concerning its ethical, social and environmental performance for the years 1993 and 1999 were compared with information obtained on Alpha's performance from other sources. Two different pictures of performance emerged leading to the conclusion that, in the case of Alpha, reports do not demonstrate a high level of accountability to key stakeholder groups on ethical, social and environmental issues. Of particular concern is the lack of “completeness” of reporting. Second, the article assesses the potential of recent standards or guidelines developed by the Global Reporting Initiative (GRI) and the Institute of Social and Ethical AccountAbility (AccountAbility) as well as the industry's own “responsible care” initiative to reduce this “reporting-performance” portrayal gap and improve corporate accountability. The conclusions point to the need for other measures to improve accountability including mandatory reporting guidelines, better developed audit guidelines, a mandatory audit requirement for MNCs and a radical overhaul of corporate governance systems.

Ethics guidelines for international multi-centre research involving people with intellectual disabilities

This position statement endorsed by the International Association for the Scientific Study of Intellectual Disabilities is designed to promote and facilitate research projects affecting and involving people with intellectual disabilities. The paucity of dedicated research infrastructure and expert ethical review processes to oversee research in this field, especially in developing countries, is asserted as a major issue to be addressed by both the scientific community and governments. International multicenter collaboration has been proposed as a means of addressing these problems. The statement draws on internationally recognized documents outlining the ethical considerations involved in human research activities. It interprets these documents in light of the particular needs and interests of people with intellectual disabilities and incorporates international consultation involving researchers from a variety of disciplines. It affirms the importance of ethical decision making in local communities. Specific recommendations are made concerning ethical review processes, research design considerations, consent processes and the conduct of research involving and affecting people with intellectual disabilities, their families and communities. Research proposals, especially those for international, multicenter projects, need to take into account cultural diversity among participants and differing legal requirements across jurisdictions, while at the same time maintaining the scientific rigor of the research protocol. Promoting partnerships between researchers and people with intellectual disability, together with their families, advocates and local communities are important considerations when developing research projects. Similarly, the development of strategies to both communicate findings to participants and their communities, and to promote their community's access to the benefits of these findings are all important ethical considerations.

Scandal, censorship and representation in the online world : an ethical conundrum

This research begins by examining the foundation issues of content censorship from a literary perspective and then proceeds in comparison to discuss the issues of online content appropriateness and whether the same censorship principles of literature are transitional to the online world. Currently, uncertainty exists in how to tackle this issue as there appears to be a lack of formal rules or suggested guidelines applied to the content appropriateness, management and availability of online material. Therefore, where does the onus of online content censorship exist in this medium? Or is it left to the ethical and moral standards of the material source/creator, online access provider or the cultural ethics of the wider community to adjudicate?