ArticleJournal of medical ethics2023
Beyond regulatory approaches to ethics: making space for ethical preparedness in healthcare research.
Article in Journal of medical ethics, 2023. 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.
- From the ICU Bedside: Applying the Transnational Clinical Academic Doctorate Lens to a Clinically Embedded PhD Journey.Journal of advanced nursing · 2026Review
- Ethical and social difficulties of addressing environmental harms related to health research.Bulletin of the World Health Organization · 2026Article
- Scientific Ritual: The Institutional Review Boards for Human Clinical Trials in Israel.Medical anthropology quarterly · 2026Article
- Rethinking ethical reflexivity and oversight in health research through an ecosystem approach: A workshop report.Research ethics · 2026Article
- Article
- The research relationship: participant perspectives on consent in biobanking.BMC medical ethics · 2025Article
- Journeys Through Genomics: Co-Producing Visual Resources to Communicate Patient Experiences.Sociological research online · 2025Article
- Ethical preparedness and developments in genomic healthcare.Journal of medical ethics · 2025Article
- A contextual integrity approach to genomic information: what bioethics can learn from big data ethics.Medicine, health care, and philosophy · 2024Article
- Responsibility for the Environmental Impact of Data-Intensive Research: An Exploration of UK Health Researchers.Science and engineering ethics · 2024Article
- Ethical preparedness in genomic medicine: how NHS clinical scientists navigate ethical issues.Journal of medical ethics · 2024Article
- Exploring how biobanks communicate the possibility of commercial access and its associated benefits and risks in participant documents.BMC medical ethics · 2022Article
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
Abstract
Centralised, compliance-focused approaches to research ethics have been normalised in practice. In this paper, we argue that the dominance of such systems has been driven by neoliberal approaches to governance, where the focus on controlling and individualising risk has led to an overemphasis of decontextualised ethical principles and the conflation of ethical requirements with the documentation of 'informed consent'. Using a UK-based case study, involving a point-of-care-genetic test as an illustration, we argue that rather than ensuring ethical practice such compliance-focused approaches may obstruct valuable research. We call for an approach that encourages researchers and research communities-including regulators, ethics committees, funders and publishers of academic research-to acquire skills to make morally appropriate decisions, and not base decision-making solely on compliance with prescriptive regulations. We call this 'ethical preparedness' and outline how a research ethics system might make space for this approach.
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.