Los comités de investigación en salud: su autoridad, responsabilidad fundamental y necesidad de que se sometan a auditorías periódicas.

Research ethics must include theoretical and practical dimensions. The first one is structured by regulations and policies, and the second dimension refers to how the committee interprets and applies those regulations and policies. This article analyses the operation of the committees at a practical level. Given that the evaluation and judgement of research protocols is a process that requires full awareness, its omission entails important implications for health research.

La ética de la investigación debe incluir las dimensiones teórica y práctica. La primera la conforman regulaciones y directrices y la segunda alude a la forma cómo los comités de ética y ética de la investigación interpretan y aplican esas regulaciones y directrices. En este artículo se analiza la operación de los comités a nivel práctico. Dado que la evaluación y el dictamen de los protocolos de investigación es un proceso que requiere consciencia plena, la omisión de esta conlleva importantes implicaciones para la investigación en salud.

Los comités de investigación en salud: su autoridad, responsabilidad fundamental y necesidad de que se sometan a auditorías periódicas / Health research committees: their authority, fundamental responsibility and the need for them to undergo periodic audits

Resumen La ética de la investigación debe incluir las dimensiones teórica y práctica. La primera la conforman regulaciones y directrices y la segunda alude a la forma cómo los comités de ética y ética de la investigación interpretan y aplican esas regulaciones y directrices. En este artículo se analiza la operación de los comités a nivel práctico. Dado que la evaluación y el dictamen de los protocolos de investigación es un proceso que requiere consciencia plena, la omisión de esta conlleva importantes implicaciones para la investigación en salud.

Abstract Research ethics must include theoretical and practical dimensions. The first one is structured by regulations and policies, and the second dimension refers to how the committee interprets and applies those regulations and policies. This article analyses the operation of the committees at a practical level. Given that the evaluation and judgement of research protocols is a process that requires full awareness, its omission entails important implications for health research.

Committees for Ethics in Research involving human subjects.

In Brazil since October 1996 there have been guidelines for research involving human subjects. Now human subjects know when their treatment is part of research. Deceit is no longer tolerated. But is not enough to say we offer an explanation to the potential subject and we offer a choice before he or she is confronted with an informed consent form. As in all professional activity, scientific investigation needs social controls. In Brazil, the ultimate responsibility of an investigation lies on the investigator, but in every institution where research is carried out there is a Committee for Ethics in Research. All Committees are subordinated to the National Commission of Ethics in Research, which is submitted to the Brazilian Institute of Health. During 2005 around 17,000 protocols involving 700,000 human subjects were revised by 475 Committees distributed all over the country. Approximately 7,000 people are now working in these Committees.

Rationalising public participation in the health service: the case of research ethics committees.

This paper seeks to raise questions about the growing emphasis on public participation in decision-making in the health service. It examines the case study of lay participation on Local Research Ethics Committees (LRECs'). In the light of contested theoretical conceptions of the value of lay participation and an absence of a centrally defined role this paper examines practice. It uses qualitative evidence collected in 45 semi-structured interviews with committee members and observations of twenty committee meetings. It examines members' own conceptualisations of lay involvement and the contributions they are able to make in meetings as a result of these conceptualisations. It concludes that without better-defined roles for lay members on these committees they do not possess the authority or knowledge to challenge the experts' technical rendering of research.

An overview of drug development in the United States and current challenges.

Drug development in the United States has undergone many changes in the past 25 years, but relatively few fully realize the complexities involved in developing a new drug. Once a promising compound is identified, it must undergo preclinical testing, have an Investigational New Drug Application filed with the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA), and proceed through clinical testing. When sufficient information is gained, a marketing application is filed with the FDA, who identifies it as a New Drug Application for drugs or a Biologics License Application for biologics. After FDA review and approval, postmarketing studies are frequently performed. The FDA and Congress have undertaken several initiatives to expand access and to accelerate drug development and review of investigational drugs for life-threatening and/or serious illnesses. Although the ultimate goal is to bring safer and more effective medical products to patients in a timely manner, multiple challenges face those who participate in drug development.