Who decides? A look at ethics committee membership.

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

Who cites it

9 citing papers in PubMed, 24 citations in OpenAlex.

1. Survey on the current practice of research ethics committees in the Czech academic environment: a mixed-methods study.BMC medical ethics · 2024
   Article
2. Barriers to Effective Deliberation in Clinical Research Oversight.HEC forum : an interdisciplinary journal on hospitals' ethical and legal issues · 2016
   Article
3. Reviewing HIV-Related Research in Emerging Economies: The Role of Government Reviewing Agencies.Developing world bioethics · 2016
   Review
4. How IRBs view and make decisions about consent forms.Journal of empirical research on human research ethics : JERHRE · 2013
   Article
5. Understanding community-based processes for research ethics review: a national study.American journal of public health · 2011
   Article
6. Assessing physicians' roles on health care ethics committees.HEC forum : an interdisciplinary journal on hospitals' ethical and legal issues · 2010
   Article
7. Confidentiality, secrecy and privacy in ethics consultation.HEC forum : an interdisciplinary journal on hospitals' ethical and legal issues · 2007
   Article
8. Factors influencing the effectiveness of research ethics committees.Journal of medical ethics · 2007
   Article
9. Informing research participants of research results: analysis of Canadian university based research ethics board policies.Journal of medical ethics · 2006
   Article

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

Authors and funding

2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Funding

Abstract

PubMed holds no abstract for this paper.

Indexed as