ReviewAcademic medicine : journal of the Association of American Medical Colleges2015
Research ethics consultation: ethical and professional practice challenges and recommendations.
Review in Academic medicine : journal of the Association of American Medical Colleges, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 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
15 citing papers in PubMed.
- Review
- Development of an evaluation indicator system for the quality of science and technology ethics review committees: a Chinese study based on the structure-process-outcome framework.BMC medical ethics · 2026Article
- "Who are you going to call?:" Research ethics consultation directors' perspectives on barriers and facilitators.Journal of clinical and translational science · 2025Article
- Review
- Current landscape of research ethics consultation services: National survey results.Journal of clinical and translational science · 2023Article
- Optimizing Ethics Engagement in Research: Learning from the Ethical Complexities of Studying Opioid Use in Pregnancy.The Journal of law, medicine & ethics : a journal of the American Society of Law, Medicine & Ethics · 2022Article
- Creating a Research Ethics Consultation Service: Issues to Consider.Ethics & human research · 2021Article
- Research ethics consultation: an attempt and 5-year experience in a Japanese University Hospital.BMC research notes · 2018Article
- Initiating research in a private dental practice.British dental journal · 2018Article
- Defining the Scope and Improving the Quality of Clinical Research Ethics Consultation: Response to Open Peer Commentaries About the National Collaborative.The American journal of bioethics : AJOB · 2018Article
- The Emergence of Clinical Research Ethics Consultation: Insights From a National Collaborative.The American journal of bioethics : AJOB · 2018Article
- The Challenges of Incorporating Research Ethics Consultation Into Institutional Human Subjects Protections Programs.The American journal of bioethics : AJOB · 2018Article
- Partnering with patients in translational oncology research: ethical approach.Journal of translational medicine · 2017Article
- Conflicts of Interest and Distribution of Resources to Community Partners: An Organizational Ethics Dilemma.Progress in community health partnerships : research, education, and action · 2017Article
- Investigating Moral Distress in Clinical Research Professionals-A Deep Dive into Troubled Waters.Ethics & human researchArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The complexity of biomedical research has increased considerably in the last decade, as has the pace of translational research. This complexity has generated a number of novel ethical issues for clinical investigators, institutional review boards (IRBs), and other oversight committees. In response, many academic medical centers have created formal research ethics consultation (REC) services to help clinical investigators and IRBs navigate ethical issues in biomedical research. Key functions of a REC service include assisting with research design and implementation, providing a forum for deliberative exploration of ethical issues, and supplementing regulatory oversight. As increasing numbers of academic research institutions establish REC services, there is a pressing need for consensus about the primary aims and policies that should guide these activities. Establishing clear expectations about the aims and policies of REC services is important if REC programs are to achieve their full potential. Drawing on the experiences of a Clinical and Translational Science Award Research Ethics Consultation Working Group, this article describes three major ethical and professional practice challenges associated with the provision of REC: (1) managing multiple institutional roles and responsibilities, (2) managing sensitive information, and (3) communicating with consultation requestors about how these issues are managed. The paper also presents several practical strategies for addressing these challenges and enhancing the quality of REC services.
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.