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 non-biomedical 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.
Two decades have passed since the first attempts were made to establish systematic ethical review of human research in the Baltic States. Legally and institutionally much has changed. In this paper we provide an historical and structural overview of ethical review of human research and identify some problems related to the role of ethical review in establishing quality research environment in these countries. Problems connected to (a) public availability of information, (b) management of conflicts of interest, (c) REC composition and motivation of REC members, and (d) differing levels of stringency of ethical review for different types of studies, are identified. Recommendations are made to strengthen cooperation among the Baltic RECs.
This article deals with concerns related to truth-telling in interaction between the doctor and the dying patient, exploring such issues as conflicting duties of veracity and non-maleficence, truthfulness and deception, and reasons behind physicians' decisions either to withhold or to disclose information about patients' diagnoses and prognoses. It focuses on various attitudes to truth-telling to dying patients, such as symmetry and asymmetry, both of which can be positive and negative. The empirical part of the article reports on the methods and results of the qualitative study carried out in Latvia during the summer of 2012. This study was based on the assessment of three case scenarios from the quantitative instrument designed by Dalla-Vorgia et al. in 1992. By means of semi-structured and focus-group interviews, evidence was gathered about physicians' and medical students' attitudes towards truth-telling, which allows the drawing of conclusions about the presence of asymmetry and symmetry in both cases. Additionally, an insight about the standards used for making decisions in case scenarios was gained and the origins of these standards were explored, revealing the aftermath of a gradual evolution from the ethics of the Soviet era to modern standards of medical ethics.
Mediji mirst kopā ar patiesību – ja tie vairs nespēj pastāvēt par savu redakcionālo neatkarību un nošķirt patiesu informāciju no postpatiesības, to eksistencei vairs nav jēgas
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.