ArticleDeveloping world bioethics2011
Twenty years of human research ethics committees in the Baltic States.
Article in Developing world bioethics, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Public awareness of and attitudes towards research biobanks in Latvia.BMC medical ethics · 2020Article
- Research Ethics in the Context of Transition: Gaps in Policies and Programs on the Protection of Research Participants in the Selected Countries of Central and Eastern Europe.Science and engineering ethics · 2016Article
- Publication ethics in biomedical journals from countries in Central and Eastern Europe.Science and engineering ethics · 2014Article
- Failures in clinical trials in the European Union: lessons from the Polish experience.Science and engineering ethics · 2013Article
- ETHICAL REVIEW OF BIOMEDICAL RESEARCH IN BELARUS: CURRENT STATUS, PROBLEMS AND PERSPECTIVES.Revista romana de bioetica · 2011Article
- Non-equivalent stringency of ethical review in the Baltic States: a sign of a systematic problem in Europe?Journal of medical ethics · 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
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Two decades have passed since the first attempts were made to establish systematic ethical review of human research in the Baltic States. Legally and institutionally much has changed. In this paper we provide an historical and structural overview of ethical review of human research and identify some problems related to the role of ethical review in establishing quality research environment in these countries. Problems connected to (a) public availability of information, (b) management of conflicts of interest, (c) REC composition and motivation of REC members, and (d) differing levels of stringency of ethical review for different types of studies, are identified. Recommendations are made to strengthen cooperation among the Baltic RECs.
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.