Abstract
According to a recent BMJ article on CIHR's decision to "disappear" its policy on clinical trial registration, "Ian Graham, CIHR's vice president Knowledge Translation and Public Outreach, stated the CIHR policy was removed 'as the overlap [with Tri-Council Policy Statement: Ethical Conduct for Research Involving Humans (TCPS 2)] will cause confusion and inconsistent application of the requirements.'"
Ironically, this explanation is itself confusing and inconsistent with previous decisions made by CIHR. There are at least three areas in which CIHR policy/guidelines overlapped with TCPS 2 (registration and results disclosure of trials, research involving Aboriginal People, and research involving human pluripotent stem cells), and in each case CIHR took a different approach.
| Original language | Canadian English |
|---|---|
| Journal | Articles, Book Chapters, & Popular Press |
| Publication status | Published - Jan. 1 2011 |
Keywords
- CIHR
- Response to Article
- Critique
- Policy and Guidelines
- Clinical Trials Policy
Disciplines
- Health Law and Policy
- Law
- Legal Writing and Research
Fingerprint
Dive into the research topics of 'Confusion Worse Confounded: A Comment on 'Withdrawl of Clinical Trials Policy by Canadian Research Institute is a 'Lost Opportunity for Increased Transparency''. Together they form a unique fingerprint.Cite this
- APA
- Author
- BIBTEX
- Harvard
- Standard
- RIS
- Vancouver