ArticleHealth and human rights2026
Defending Informed Consent: Civil Society's Victory Against Emergency Research Deregulation in South Korea.
Article in Health and human rights, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Informed consent is both a foundational principle of research ethics and a human right grounded in self-determination and bodily integrity. During the COVID-19 pandemic, legislative attempts were made in South Korea to bypass informed consent and ethics review requirements for research involving patients with infectious diseases. Framed as emergency measures to accelerate biomedical innovation, the proposals sparked resistance from a broad coalition of civil society actors, including human rights advocates, patient organizations, labor unions, medical professionals, and bioethics scholars. This coalition, drawing on international bioethics norms and lessons from past research ethics controversies, mounted a coordinated public response, warning that such deregulation could erode fundamental ethical safeguards and set a concerning precedent. Their efforts helped prevent the proposed legislation from advancing in the parliamentary process. This defense of informed consent must be understood within the context of South Korea's post-authoritarian democratic evolution. Decades of civic struggle-from resistance to military dictatorship to the response to a constitutional crisis triggered by a martial law declaration in 2024-have shaped a politically conscious and ethically engaged public. This case study illustrates how informed consent can function not simply as a technical or procedural requirement but as a hard-won civil right anchored in democratic participation. South Korea's experience offers globally relevant insights into the role of civic vigilance in safeguarding human rights, especially during public health crises and emergency rule.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42440961PMC13334786What 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.