Report and recommendations: Research involving prisoners -- Preface

This preface is the first of five files creating a single report entitled: Research involving prisoners.The Preface of this report contains introductory letters as well as a synopsis of the recommendations the Commission compiled with regard to prisoner research.Supported by the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare (DHEW)

Report and recommendations: research on the fetus appendix -- Part 16

This is the appendix to the 'Reports and recommendations: research on the fetus'. This appendix contains multiple parts. Each part equates to a file. Files include parts 1-16.Part 1 of this report discusses human fetal research. Part 2 explores the value of life. Part 3 considers an ethical appraisal. Part 4 discusses balancing the need for experimentation versus obligation to the fetus. Part 5 proposes fetal research policy. Part 6 discusses moral issues. Part 7 nonviable fetus research. Part 8 covers ethical and public policy. Part 9 explores ethical issues concerning the nonviable fetus. Part 10 discusses moral issues and institutional control. Part 11 discusses defining death in fetuses. Part 12 reports on distinguishing between viable and nonviable. Part 13 relates to the law on fetus experimentation. Part 14 reports on the legal issues involved in research on the fetus. Part 15 assesses the Batelle Report and the Cook Critique. Part 16 covers the stability of the decision to seek induced abortion

Report and recommendations: Research involving prisoners -- Part III

Part III is the fourth of five files creating a single report entitled: Research involving prisonersPart III of this report contains the activities of the Commission including site visits and public hearings.Supported by the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare (DHEW)

Report and recommendations: Research involving prisoners -- Part II

Part II is the third of five files creating a single report entitled: Research involving prisoners.General history, nature, and extent of research involving prisoners in the United States is discussed in Part II.Supported by the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare (DHEW)

Investigators’ Successful Strategies for Working with Institutional Review Boards

This study was designed to identify successful strategies used by investigators for working with their Institutional Review Boards (IRBs) in conducting human subjects research. Telephone interviews were conducted with 46 investigators representing nursing, medicine, and social work. Interview transcripts were analyzed using qualitative descriptive methods. Investigators emphasized the importance of intentionally cultivating positive relationships with IRB staff and members, and managing bureaucracy. A few used evasive measures to avoid conflict with IRBs. Few successful strategies were identified for working with multiple IRBs. Although most investigators developed successful methods for working with IRBs, further research is needed on how differences in IRB culture affect human subjects protection, and on best approaches to IRB approval of multi-site studies

How payment for research participation can be coercive

The idea that payment for research participation can be coercive appears widespread among research ethics committee members, researchers, and regulatory bodies. Yet analysis of the concept of coercion by philosophers and bioethicists has mostly concluded that payment does not coerce, because coercion necessarily involves threats, not offers. In this article we aim to resolve this disagreement by distinguishing between two distinct but overlapping concepts of coercion. Consent- undermining coercion marks out certain actions as impermissible and certain agreements as unenforceable. By contrast, coercion as subjection indicates a way in which someone’s interests can be partially set back in virtue of being subject to another’s foreign will. While offers of payment do not normally constitute consent-undermining coercion, they do sometimes constitute coercion as subjection. We offer an analysis of coercion as subjection and propose three possible practical responses to worries about the coerciveness of payment

Improving data availability for brain image biobanking in healthy subjects: practice-based suggestions from an international multidisciplinary working group

International audienceBrain imaging is now ubiquitous in clinical practice and research. The case for bringing together large amounts of image data from well-characterised healthy subjects and those with a range of common brain diseases across the life course is now compelling. This report follows a meeting of international experts from multiple disciplines, all interested in brain image biobanking. The meeting included neuroimaging experts (clinical and non-clinical), computer scientists, epidemiologists, clinicians, ethicists, and lawyers involved in creating brain image banks. The meeting followed a structured format to discuss current and emerging brain image banks; applications such as atlases; conceptual and statistical problems (e.g. defining 'normality'); legal, ethical and technological issues (e.g. consents, potential for data linkage, data security, harmonisation, data storage and enabling of research data sharing). We summarise the lessons learned from the experiences of a wide range of individual image banks, and provide practical recommendations to enhance creation, use and reuse of neuroimaging data. Our aim is to maximise the benefit of the image data, provided voluntarily by research participants and funded by many organisations, for human health. Our ultimate vision is of a federated network of brain image biobanks accessible for large studies of brain structure and function