Advertisement
AJPH
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     

This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Submit a response
Right arrow purchase articles
Right arrow View Shopping Cart
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when eLetters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Related articles in AJPH
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Right arrow Get other permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Putney, S. B.
Right arrow Articles by Gruskin, S.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Putney, S. B.
Right arrow Articles by Gruskin, S.
Related Collections
Right arrow Ethics
Right arrow Health Policy
Right arrow Other Statistics/Evaluation/Research
July 2002, Vol 92, No. 7 | American Journal of Public Health 1067-1070
© 2002 American Public Health Association

HEALTH POLICY AND ETHICS FORUM

Time, Place, and Consciousness: Three Dimensions of Meaning for US Institutional Review Boards

Sarah B. Putney, JD and Sofia Gruskin, JD, MIA

Sarah B. Putney is with the Human Subjects Committee and Sofia Gruskin is with the Program on International Health and Human Rights, François-Xavier Bagnoud Center for Health and Human Rights Harvard School of Public Health, Boston, Mass.

Correspondence: Requests for reprints should be sent to Sarah B. Putney, JD, Human Subjects Committee, Harvard School of Public Health, 1613 Tremont St, Boston MA 02120 (email: sputney{at}hsph.harvard.edu).

In the past few years, US federal agencies governing research with human subjects and institutional review boards have taken a higher-profile path than ever before, both at home and internationally. This trend carries profound significance for US-based institutions and has implications also for the rest of the world.

What does this critical moment of heightened federal scrutiny mean for the workings of US institutional review boards? We examined board activity across 3 dimensions: time, place, and consciousness. We conclude that although institutions in all areas of biomedical and social science research are adapting their practices, the field of public health is especially well positioned to adapt to, and succeed in, new efforts to ensure protection of human research subjects. (Am J Public Health. 2002;92:1067–1070)


Related articles in AJPH:

Ethics in Public Health
Mohammad N. Akhter and Mary E. Northridge
AJPH 2002 92: 1056. [Extract] [Full Text]  



This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 AJPHHome page
B. Bozeman, C. Slade, and P. Hirsch
Understanding Bureaucracy in Health Science Ethics: Toward a Better Institutional Review Board
Am J Public Health, September 1, 2009; 99(9): 1549 - 1556.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 NEJMHome page
J. M. Drazen
Controlling Research Trials
N. Engl. J. Med., April 3, 2003; 348(14): 1377 - 1380.
[Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 AJPHHome page
R. P. Wedeen
ETHICS IN PUBLIC HEALTH INSTITUTIONS
Am J Public Health, December 1, 2002; 92(12): 1884 - 1885.
[Full Text] [PDF]


HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Copyright © 2002 by the American Public Health Association