ArticleClinical and translational science2015
Building a Central Repository for Research Ethics Consultation Data: A Proposal for a Standard Data Collection Tool.
Article in Clinical and translational science, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed.
- "Who are you going to call?:" Research ethics consultation directors' perspectives on barriers and facilitators.Journal of clinical and translational science · 2025Article
- Current landscape of research ethics consultation services: National survey results.Journal of clinical and translational science · 2023Article
- Aligning clinical research ethics with community-engaged and participatory research in the United States.Frontiers in public health · 2023Review
- 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
- Strategies to Guide the Return of Genomic Research Findings: An Australian Perspective.Journal of bioethical inquiry · 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
- Conflicts of Interest and Distribution of Resources to Community Partners: An Organizational Ethics Dilemma.Progress in community health partnerships : research, education, and action · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
15 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Clinical research ethics consultation services have been established across academic health centers over the past decade. This paper presents the results of collaboration within the CTSA consortium to develop a standard approach to the collection of research ethics consultation information to serve as a foundation for quality improvement, education, and research efforts. This approach includes categorizing and documenting descriptive information about the requestor, research project, the ethical question, the consult process, and describing the basic structure for a consult note. This paper also explores challenges in determining how to share some of this information between collaborating institutions related to concerns about confidentially, data quality, and informatics. While there is much still to be learned to improve the process of clinical research ethics consultation, these tools can advance these efforts, which, in turn, can facilitate the ethical conduct of research.
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.