We have located links that may give you full text access.
JOURNAL ARTICLE
MULTICENTER STUDY
Members of research ethics committees accepted a modification of the randomized consent design.
Journal of Clinical Epidemiology 2005 June
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: The use of randomized consent designs has been subject of methodologic and ethical controversy. In most Western countries, research ethics committees make the decision as to whether a randomized consent design can be applied. The purpose of the study is to assess to what extent a randomized consent design and a modification of this design is accepted by research ethics committees, in terms of ethics, health law, and methodology.
METHODS: A postal survey was conducted among members of research ethics committees in the United Kingdom, and in The Netherlands, with professional competence in ethics, (health) law, methodology, or clinical practice.
RESULTS: In both the UK and in The Netherlands, the modified randomized consent design appears to be statistically significantly more acceptable than the randomized consent design, with respect to ethical and judicial aspects. The overall rejection rate of the randomized consent design was 66% in the UK and 59% in The Netherlands. However, the modified randomized consent design was rejected by 47 and 41% in the two countries, respectively.
CONCLUSION: the modified randomized consent design appears to be more acceptable than the randomized consent design. To increase consistency in the way research ethics committees handle study protocols, a discussion about the use of randomized consent designs appears necessary.
METHODS: A postal survey was conducted among members of research ethics committees in the United Kingdom, and in The Netherlands, with professional competence in ethics, (health) law, methodology, or clinical practice.
RESULTS: In both the UK and in The Netherlands, the modified randomized consent design appears to be statistically significantly more acceptable than the randomized consent design, with respect to ethical and judicial aspects. The overall rejection rate of the randomized consent design was 66% in the UK and 59% in The Netherlands. However, the modified randomized consent design was rejected by 47 and 41% in the two countries, respectively.
CONCLUSION: the modified randomized consent design appears to be more acceptable than the randomized consent design. To increase consistency in the way research ethics committees handle study protocols, a discussion about the use of randomized consent designs appears necessary.
Full text links
Related Resources
Trending Papers
Challenges in Septic Shock: From New Hemodynamics to Blood Purification Therapies.Journal of Personalized Medicine 2024 Februrary 4
Molecular Targets of Novel Therapeutics for Diabetic Kidney Disease: A New Era of Nephroprotection.International Journal of Molecular Sciences 2024 April 4
Perioperative echocardiographic strain analysis: what anesthesiologists should know.Canadian Journal of Anaesthesia 2024 April 11
The 'Ten Commandments' for the 2023 European Society of Cardiology guidelines for the management of endocarditis.European Heart Journal 2024 April 18
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app