ReviewJournal of the Royal Society of Medicine2006
Research governance: regulating risk and reducing harm?
Review in Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine, 2006. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.
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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- The Ubuntu Way: Ensuring Ethical AI Integration in Health Research.Wellcome open research · 2024Review
- Conducting a prospective evaluation of the development of a complex psycho-oncological care programme (isPO) in Germany.BMC health services research · 2022Article
- Inclusion of American Indians and Alaskan Natives in Large National Studies: Ethical Considerations and Implications for Biospecimen Collection in the HEALthy Brain and Child Development Study.Adversity and resilience science · 2020Article
- Increasing value and reducing waste in biomedical research regulation and management.Lancet (London, England) · 2014Article
- Regulation and the social licence for medical research.Medicine, health care, and philosophy · 2008Article
- The Department of Health's research governance framework remains an impediment to multi-centre studies: findings from a national descriptive study.Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine · 2007Article
- Research governance impediments to clinical trials: a retrospective survey.Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine · 2007Article
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Risk assessment can be thought of as the lens through which we anticipate the consequences of research and the impact of the actions of researchers. The way in which risk of harm is managed in research is strongly influenced by the surrounding social and political environment, leading to differences in national and local styles of regulation and review. Different research studies carry different risks, so systems for review and approval must adapt to the question being asked and the nature of the study. Researchers can never wholly guarantee safety in any research but participants and researchers must be offered reasonable protection within any study, with appropriate arrangements in place should something go wrong.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.