Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 20 de 56.681
Filtrar
1.
Rev. bioét. derecho ; (50): 407-423, nov. 2020. tab, graf
Artigo em Português | IBECS | ID: ibc-191365

RESUMO

O processo de consentimento informado para participação de pesquisa com seres humanos visa fornecer as informações adequadas ao indivíduo possibilitando que este tome a decisão de participar de maneira voluntária, livre de pressões externas. A possibilidade de remuneração poderia interferir na voluntariedade deste processo de consentir. O presente estudo objetivou avaliar percepção de influência da remuneração monetária por meio de simulações de pesquisa que variam em nível de risco (Bioequivalência e de Fase I) e tipo de remuneração monetária (com e sem). Participaram do estudo 80 voluntários. Os resultados sugerem que a remuneração não constituiu uma interferência na voluntariedade do processo de consentimento, visto que participantes aceitaram convite para participar da primeira pesquisa para a qual foram convidados e não se sentiram influenciados indebidamente


El proceso de consentimiento informado para la participación de sujetos humanos en investigación tiene por objeto dar la información adecuada al individuo, permitiendo que tome la decisión de participar de manera voluntaria y libre de presiones externas. La posibilidad de remuneración podría interferir en la voluntariedad de este proceso de consentir. El presente estudio evalúa la percepción de la influencia de la remuneración monetaria a través de simulaciones de investigación que varían en nivel de riesgo (Bioequivalencia y de Fase I) y tipo de remuneración monetaria (con y sin). Participaron del estudio 80 voluntarios. Los resultados sugieren que la remuneración no constituyó una interferencia en la voluntariedad del proceso de consentimiento, ya que los participantes aceptaron una invitación para participar en la primera encuesta a la que fueron invitados y no se sintieron influenciados incorrectamente


El procés de consentiment informat per a la participació de subjectes humans en recerca té per objecte donar la informació adequada a l'individu, permetent que prengui la decisió de participar de manera voluntària I lliure de pressions externes. La possibilitat de remuneració podria interferir en la voluntarietat d'aquest procés de consentir. El present estudi avalua la percepció de la influència de la remuneració monetària a través de simulacions de recerca que varien en nivell de risc (Bioequivalencia I de Fase I) I tipus de remuneració monetària (amb I sense). Van participar de l'estudi 80 voluntaris. Els resultats suggereixen que la remuneració no va constituir una interferència en la voluntarietat del procés de consentiment, ja que els participants van acceptar una invitació per a participar en la primera enquesta a la qual van ser convidats I no es van sentir influenciats incorrectament


The process of informed consent for research participation with human beings aims to provide appropriate information to individuals enabling him or her to make the decision to participate voluntarily, free of external pressures. The possibility of remuneration could interfere in the willingness to consent. The present study aims to evaluate the perception of influence of the monetary payment through research simulations that vary in the level of risk (Bioequivalence and Phase I) and type of monetary payment (with and without). Eighty volunteers participated in the study. The results suggest that remuneration did not interfere with the willingness of the consent process, as participants accepted an invitation to participate in the first research option to which they were invited to and did not feel undue influence


Assuntos
Humanos , Masculino , Feminino , Adolescente , Adulto Jovem , Adulto , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Idoso , Pesquisa Biomédica/economia , Remuneração , Decisões , Consentimento Livre e Esclarecido , Ética em Pesquisa , Fatores Socioeconômicos
4.
J Law Med ; 27(4): 779-789, 2020 Aug.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32880397

RESUMO

The COVID-19 pandemic has created an environment highly conducive to substandard and fraudulent research. The incentives and temptations for the unethical are substantial. The articles published during 2020 in The Lancet and the New England Journal of Medicine that were based on spurious datasets, allegedly hosted by a cloud-based health care analytics platform, are deeply confronting for research integrity. They illustrate the perils of precipitate publication, inadequate peer-reviewing and co-authorship without proper assumption of responsibility. A period of crisis such as that in existence during the COVID-19 pandemic calls for high-quality research that is robustly evaluated. It is not a time for panic to propel premature publication or for relaxation in scholarly standards. Any other approach will replicate errors of the past and result in illusory research breakthroughs to global detriment.


Assuntos
Pesquisa Biomédica , Infecções por Coronavirus , Pandemias , Pneumonia Viral , Má Conduta Científica , Autoria , Betacoronavirus , Humanos , Editoração
5.
J Law Med ; 27(4): 901-913, 2020 Aug.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32880408

RESUMO

The outbreak of COVID-19 in China and the resulting global pandemic have necessitated vigorous research into how this new virus works, how it can be cured and prevented, what kind of vaccine will work, and various other issues. To facilitate this research and enable quick scientific progress, rapid and immediate knowledge sharing among researchers globally became essential, including access to existing and new coronavirus-related research publications. This article discusses international responses to the need for immediate and rapid access to global health and medical research to combat the COVID-19 pandemic, and demonstrates how the exercise of copyright control restricts widespread access to knowledge, especially when published in journals. Ultimately, it recommends open access publishing as an effective way of circumventing copyright restrictions on health and medical research.


Assuntos
Pesquisa Biomédica , Infecções por Coronavirus , Pandemias , Pneumonia Viral , Betacoronavirus , China , Humanos
6.
Revista Digital de Postgrado ; 9(2): 204, ago. 2020.
Artigo em Espanhol | LILACS, LIVECS | ID: biblio-1103539

RESUMO

Como parte de la evaluación de la asignatura Bioética e Investigación de la Maestría en Bioética, se solicitó a los estudiantes de la VI Cohorte que realizarán un análisis comparativo de las Pautas CIOMS 2016 con documentos anteriores. En esta segunda parte, se presentan las pautas relacionadas con el consentimiento informado, la recolección, almacenamiento y uso de materiales biológicos y datos relacionados, así como la rendición pública de cuentas y la publicación de las investigaciones. Estas pautas son fundamentales para la realización de investigaciones científicas en seres humanos por eso el objetivo de estos trabajos es proporcionar a los investigadores un aporte en su formación y una rápida adaptación a la nueva propuesta CIOMS(AU)


As part of the evaluation of the Bioethics and Research subject of the Master in Bioethics, students of the VI Cohort were asked to make a comparative analysis of the CIOMS 2016 Guidelines with previous documents. In this second part, the guidelines related to informed consent, collection, storage and use of biological materials and related data, as well as public accountability and publication of research are presented. These guidelines are fundamental for carrying out scientific research on human beings, and for this reason the objective of this work is to provide researchers with a contribution in their training and a rapid adaptation to the new CIOMS proposal(AU)


Assuntos
Humanos , Masculino , Feminino , Bioética , Guias de Prática Clínica como Assunto , Pesquisa Biomédica/normas , Consentimento Livre e Esclarecido , Defesa do Paciente , Faculdades de Medicina , Direitos Humanos
8.
Saudi Med J ; 41(8): 791-801, 2020 Aug.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32789418

RESUMO

OBJECTIVES: To map research production by Saudi-affiliated investigators in order to identify areas of strength and weakness. Method: We followed the Arksey and O'Malley (2005) framework. Medline and Cochrane databases were searched with a focus on identifying articles related to COVID-19 and Saudi Arabia following the PRISMA protocol. The study was conducted at King Saud University, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia between March and May 2020. Results: A total of 53 articles were ultimately included. Most of the research production from Saudi Arabia was opinion and narrative reviews related to the clinicopathological features of COVID-19 as well as control and prevention of virus spread.  Conclusion: The results of this scoping review identify a relative deficiency in original research, which requires further investigation.


Assuntos
Betacoronavirus , Pesquisa Biomédica , Infecções por Coronavirus , Pandemias , Pneumonia Viral , Infecções por Coronavirus/diagnóstico , Infecções por Coronavirus/terapia , Humanos , Pneumonia Viral/diagnóstico , Pneumonia Viral/terapia , Arábia Saudita
10.
PLoS Biol ; 18(8): e3000815, 2020 08.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32760062

RESUMO

Two illustrations integrate current knowledge about severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) coronaviruses and their life cycle. They have been widely used in education and outreach through free distribution as part of a coronavirus-related resource at Protein Data Bank (PDB)-101, the education portal of the RCSB PDB. Scientific sources for creation of the illustrations and examples of dissemination and response are presented.


Assuntos
Betacoronavirus/crescimento & desenvolvimento , Pesquisa Biomédica/educação , Infecções por Coronavirus/prevenção & controle , Bases de Dados de Proteínas , Medicina nas Artes , Pandemias/prevenção & controle , Pneumonia Viral/prevenção & controle , Animais , Betacoronavirus/fisiologia , Pesquisa Biomédica/métodos , Infecções por Coronavirus/epidemiologia , Infecções por Coronavirus/virologia , Apresentação de Dados , Humanos , Disseminação de Informação/métodos , Estágios do Ciclo de Vida , Pneumonia Viral/epidemiologia , Pneumonia Viral/virologia , Mucosa Respiratória/virologia
19.
Dis Model Mech ; 13(6)2020 06 23.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32764155

RESUMO

The outbreak of COVID-19 has stalled both the basic, clinical and non-COVID medical research. The scientific community has shown extraordinary flexibility and resilience in responding to the pandemic. However, funding restructuring, risk of infection, cancelation of scientific conferences and delayed experiments have already proven detrimental to the career opportunities of early-career scientists. Moreover, school closures and a lack of systematic support for childcare have been additional challenges for early- and mid-career researchers who have young children. This Editorial describes an early-career researcher's experience and highlights how after efficiently contributing to 'flattening the curve' of COVID-19 infections, the research community has an opportunity for growth and re-structuring.


Assuntos
Betacoronavirus , Pesquisa Biomédica , Infecções por Coronavirus/epidemiologia , Pandemias , Pneumonia Viral/epidemiologia , Pesquisa Biomédica/economia , Criança , Cuidado da Criança/economia , Cuidado da Criança/provisão & distribução , Pré-Escolar , Humanos , Pessoal de Laboratório Médico , Cidade de Nova Iorque/epidemiologia , Pesquisadores
SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA