Preliminary programme: Wednesday June 16
Ethical review boards: important ethical safeguards or over-burdensome and unnecessary bureaucracy?
Plenary session
| 09:00 | Introduction |
| 09:15 | Are Research Ethics Committees Working in the Best Interests of Participants in an Increasingly Globalised Research Environment? Don Chalmers Faculty of Law, University of Tasmania, Australia Abstract > |
| 09:50 | Estimating the Deaths from Research Regulation Simon Whitney Department of Family and Community Medicine, Baylor College of Medicine, USA Abstract > |
| 10:20 | Break |
| 10:50 | Keynote response Søren Holm Centre for Social Ethics and Policy, Manchester University, United Kingdom |
| 11:20 | Response and panel discussion |
| 11:35 | Open discussion |
| 12:30 | Lunch |
The afternoon programme consists of four sessions: two consecutive and three parallel:
- The legitimacy and function of ethical review boards
[13:30-14:40] - Ethical review boards and research
[15:10-16:25] - Challenges facing ethical review boards
- The norms and values of ethical review boards
I. The legitimacy and function of ethical review boards
| 13:30 | Who guards the guardian? A critical analysis of the legal legitimacy of institutional review boards |
|
|
| 13:55 | Ethical review: what place for law, regulation and governance? |
|
|
| 14:20 | Ethical review board "light" for research projects using codified human tissues |
|
|
| 14:40 | Coffee |
II. Ethical review boards and research
|
|
| 15:10 | Systematic distrust promoting trust? The ethics committee and biobank research |
|
|
| 15:35 | Global standards for Research Ethics Committees: Presentation of Draft document and request for feedback |
|
|
| 16:00 | The influence of the EU-directive on the quality of non-commercial clinical trials in Sweden |
III. Challenges facing ethical review boards
| 13:30 | The minimal risk controversy |
|
|
| 13:55 | The ethics of human volunteer studies involving experimental exposure to pesticides: Unanswered dilemmas |
|
|
| 14:20 | Informed consent and ethic committees in the midst of a natural disaster |
|
|
| 14:40 | Coffee |
|
|
| 15:10 | The diverse ethics of translational research |
|
|
| 15:35 | Application of ethical matrix for ethical review of research projects in public health. A European prospective |
|
|
| 16:00 | Rethinking ethical boundaries of grounded theory approach |
IV. The norms and values of ethical review boards
| 13:30 | The role of ELSI research in science projects |
|
|
| 13:55 | Judging or improving research proposals? The meeting of two logics in ethical review meetings |
|
|
| 14:20 | Demanding informed consent from critically ill patients may result in discrimination: A case report from a study on patients with ruptured aortic aneurysm |
|
|
| 14:40 | Coffee |
|
|
| 15:10 | The trouble with ethics: refocusing analysis |
|
|
| 15:35 | What kind of projects medical research ethics committees judge? |
|
|
| 16:00 | Biobank research based on presumed consent |
Organisers
The conference is arranged by Cesagen at the universities of Lancaster and Cardiff and the Centre for Research Ethics & Bioethics at Uppsala University.
The Centre for Research Ethics and Bioethics is an interfaculty centre at Uppsala University.
Cesagen is a collaborative research centre which is funded as part of the ESRC Genomics Network. The Centre is based at the universities of Lancaster and Cardiff.






