Understanding bureaucracy in health science ethics: Toward a better institutional review board

Barry Bozeman, Catherine Slade, Paul Hirsch

Research output: Contribution to journalReview article

9 Scopus citations

Abstract

Research involving human participants continues to grow dramatically, fueled by advances in medical technology, globalization of research, and financial and professional incentives. This creates increasing opportunities for ethical errors with devastating effects. The typical professional and policy response to calamities involving human participants in research is to layer on more ethical guidelines or strictures. We used a recent case - the Johns Hopkins University/Kennedy Kreiger Institute Lead Paint Study - to examine lessons learned since the Tuskegee Syphilis Study about the role of institutionalized science ethics in the protection of human participants in research. We address the role of the institutional review board as the focal point for policy attention.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)1549-1556
Number of pages8
JournalAmerican journal of public health
Volume99
Issue number9
DOIs
StatePublished - Sep 1 2009
Externally publishedYes

    Fingerprint

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health

Cite this