Skip to main navigation Skip to search Skip to main content

Non-equivalent stringency of ethical review in the Baltic States: A sign of a systematic problem in Europe?

  • E. Gefenas*
  • , V. Dranseika
  • , A. Cekanauskaite
  • , K. Hug
  • , S. Mezinska
  • , E. Peicius
  • , V. Silis
  • , A. Soosaar
  • , M. Strosberg
  • *Corresponding author for this work
  • Vilnius University
  • Lund University
  • Riga Stradins University
  • Lithuanian University of Health Sciences
  • University of Tartu
  • Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

18 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

We analyse the system of ethical review of human research in the Baltic States by introducing the principle of equivalent stringency of ethical review, that is, research projects imposing equal risks and inconveniences on research participants should be subjected to equally stringent review procedures. We examine several examples of non-equivalence or asymmetry in the system of ethical review of human research: (1) the asymmetry between rather strict regulations of clinical drug trials and relatively weaker regulations of other types of clinical biomedical research and (2) gaps in ethical review in the area of nonbiomedical human research where some sensitive research projects are not reviewed by research ethics committees at all. We conclude that non-equivalent stringency of ethical review is at least partly linked to the differences in scope and binding character of various international legal instruments that have been shaping the system of ethical review in the Baltic States. Therefore, the Baltic example could also serve as an object lesson to other European countries which might be experiencing similar problems.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)435-439
JournalJournal of Medical Ethics
Volume36
Issue number7
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Jul 2010
Externally publishedYes

OECD Field of Science

  • 3. Medical and Health Sciences

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Non-equivalent stringency of ethical review in the Baltic States: A sign of a systematic problem in Europe?'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this