Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Experiment Videos

Does biomedical research need an ethical watchdog?

D R Hales

    The Hospital Medical Staff
    |June 11, 1978
    PubMed
    Summary
    This summary is machine-generated.

    Related Concept Videos

    You might also read

    Related Articles

    Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

    Sort by
    Same author

    Experimental study of the anthelmintic value of the cyanine drugs in dogs.

    Federation proceedings·2010
    Same author

    In this GP's practice...the patients help call the shots.

    American medical news·1980
    Same author

    "Gentle persuasion" can cut costs.

    American medical news·1980
    Same author

    Parenteral nutrition: first decade, trends.

    Hospitals·1979
    Same author

    Doctors in hard hats.

    American medical news·1979
    Same author

    Surgeons question future of surgical training, second opinions.

    Hospitals·1979

    An ethical watchdog group for biomedical research is recommended to ensure public involvement in technological advancements. This ensures societal values align with scientific progress and ethical oversight.

    Area of Science:

    • Biomedical Ethics
    • Research Oversight

    Background:

    • Public perception of scientific advances is generally positive.
    • Societal involvement in decisions regarding future technology is crucial.

    Purpose of the Study:

    • To highlight the need for an ethical watchdog group in biomedical research.
    • To emphasize the importance of public engagement in technological decision-making.

    Main Methods:

    • Review of the preliminary report by the National Commission for the Protection of Human Subjects of Biomedical and Behavioral Research.
    • Analysis of public perception towards scientific advancements.

    Main Results:

    • A major recommendation was the establishment of an ethical watchdog group.
    • The public requires information and involvement in future technology decisions.
    Keywords:
    National Commission for the Protection of Human Subjects

    Related Experiment Videos

    Conclusions:

    • An ethical oversight body is essential for responsible biomedical research.
    • Informed public participation is vital for navigating technological advancements ethically.