ArticleJournal of medical ethics2006
Research ethics committees in Europe: implementing the directive, respecting diversity.
Article in Journal of medical ethics, 2006. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 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
12 citing papers in PubMed.
- Bioethics committee approvals in multicentre laryngology research across Europe: the European Laryngological Society's consensus on legal basis and quality assurance.European archives of oto-rhino-laryngology : official journal of the European Federation of Oto-Rhino-Laryngological Societies (EUFOS) : affiliated with the German Society for Oto-Rhino-Laryngology - Head and Neck Surgery · 2026Article
- The Benefit of an Umbrella Protocol: Reducing Challenges in Orthopedic Oncology Research.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Article
- How ethics committees and requirements are structuring health research in the Philippines: a qualitative study.BMC medical ethics · 2021Article
- Clinical Ethics Consultation in the Transition Countries of Central and Eastern Europe.Science and engineering ethics · 2020Article
- Social and Communicative Functions of Informed Consent Forms in East Asia and Beyond.Frontiers in genetics · 2017Article
- National Human Research Ethics: A Preliminary Comparative Case Study of Germany, Great Britain, Romania, and Sweden.Ethics & behavior · 2016Article
- Research ethics committees in the regulation of clinical research: comparison of Finland to England, Canada, and the United States.Health research policy and systems · 2016Article
- Increasing value and reducing waste in biomedical research regulation and management.Lancet (London, England) · 2014Article
- From anonymity to "open doors": IRB responses to tensions with researchers.BMC research notes · 2012Article
- How local IRBs view central IRBs in the US.BMC medical ethics · 2011Article
- ETHICAL REVIEW OF BIOMEDICAL RESEARCH IN BELARUS: CURRENT STATUS, PROBLEMS AND PERSPECTIVES.Revista romana de bioetica · 2011Article
- Frontline ethical issues in pediatric clinical research: ethical and regulatory aspects of seven current bottlenecks in pediatric clinical research.European journal of pediatrics · 2010Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
With the recent Clinical Trials Directive, a degree of harmonisation into research ethics committees (RECs) across Europe, including the time taken to assess a trial proposal and the kinds of issues a committee should take into account, has been introduced by the European Union (EU). How four different member states-Hungary, Portugal, Sweden and the UK-have chosen to implement the directive is shown. Although this has resulted in four very different ways of structuring RECs, similar themes are present in all four cases, such as centralisation of control over RECs within member states, harmonisation of REC procedures across the EU and increased role of political decision making with regard to such committees.
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.