Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35600214›Full record

ArticleJournal of medical ethics and history of medicine2021

Challenges for ethics committees in biomedical research governance: illustrations from China and Australia.

Cao Huanhuan, Ming Li, Mingxu Wang, David Roder, Ian Olver

Open access · diamondAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of medical ethics and history of medicine, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
1.4field-weighted citation impact, top 20% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

5 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Observational
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 5 institutions in 2 countries.

Cao HuanhuanEditor, Chinese Medical Ethics Magazine, Xi'an Shaanxi, China.
Ming LiSenior Research Fellow, Cancer Research Institute, University of South Australia, Adelaide, Australia.
Mingxu WangChair Professor, Division of Biomedical Ethics, Xian Jiaotong University, Xi'an Shaanxi, China.
David RoderBeat Cancer Research Chair and Professor, Cancer Epidemiology and Population Health, University of South Australia, Adelaide, Australia.
Ian OlverProfessorial Research Fellow, School of Psychology, Faculty of Health and Medical Sciences University of Adelaide, Adelaide, Australia.
Cancer Australia · AUCentre for Cancer Biology · AUShaanxi University of Chinese Medicine · CNThe University of Adelaide · AUXi'an Jiaotong University · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In this paper, the evolution of the ethics committees for health research, their history, membership, and function in China and Australia is described. Investigators in each country compared the history and governance of their ethical systems based on the published evidence rather than personal opinions. Similarly, examples of challenges were selected from the literature. In both countries, the aim was to maximize the social benefits of research and minimize the risk imposed on the participants. Common challenges include maintaining independence, funding and delivering timely ethical reviews of the research projects. These challenges can be difficult where research ethics committees rely on voluntary contributions and lack a strong resource base. They must adapt to the increasingly rapid pace of research as well as the technological sophistication. Population health research can challenge the conventional views of consent and privacy. The principles of the sound ethical review are common in both countries; governance arrangements and operational procedures, however, can differ, reflecting the cultural values and norms of their host countries and in respect of legal environments. By studying the evolution and function of ethics committees in the two countries, we established the differences in the governance and health systems, while similar ethical objectives helped sustain collaborative research.

Indexed as

AustraliaChinaEthics committeesHistory.

Identifiers

PMID35600214
PMCPMC9081802
OpenAlexW4206125429

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.