title: Human research ethics committees: examining their roles and practices.
abstract: Considerable time and resources are invested in the ethics review process. We present qualitative data on how human research ethics committee members and health researchers perceive the role and function of the committee. The findings are based on interviews with 34 Australian ethics committee members and 54 health researchers. Although all participants agreed that the primary role of the ethics committee was to protect participants, there was disagreement regarding the additional roles undertaken by committees. Of particular concern were the perceptions from some ethics committee members and researchers that ethics committees were working to protect the institution's interests, as well as being overprotective toward research participants. This has the potential to lead to poor relations and mistrust between ethics committees and researchers.
authors: University of Melbourne, Australia. m.guillemin@unimelb.edu.au
authors: Marilys
authors: M
authors: Guillemin
authors: Lynn
authors: L
authors: Gillam
authors: Doreen
authors: D
authors: Rosenthal
authors: Annie
authors: A
authors: Bolitho
mesh_terms: D001294:Attitude to Health; D001315:Australia; D035843:Biomedical Research / Q000941:ethics*; D032802:Committee Membership; D026724:Ethical Review; D028744:Ethics Committees, Research / Q000941:ethics*; D006805:Human Experimentation / Q000941:ethics*; D006801:Humans; D007407:Interviews as Topic; D010465:Perception; D024382:Professional Role; D036301:Qualitative Research; D012108:Research Personnel; D035502:Trust