We present an analytical frame-work for use by fellows of the Fogarty International Center–sponsored Advanced Certificate Program in Research Ethics for Central and Eastern Europe to identify gaps in the public policies establishing research ethics review systems that impede them from doing their job of protecting human research subjects. The framework, illustrated by examples from post-Communist countries, employs a logic model based on the public policy and public management literature. This paper is part of a collection of papers analyzing the Fogarty International Center's International Research Ethics Education and Curriculum program.
Advanced Certificate Program in Research Ethics for Central and Eastern Europe. Union Graduate College and Vilnius University. researchethicseurope.com.
2.
BrodyB. A. (1998). The ethics of biomedical research: An international perspective. New York: Oxford University Press.
3.
ColemanC. H., & BouësseauM-C. (2008). How do we know that research ethics committees are really working? The neglected role of outcomes assessment in research ethics review. BMC Medical Ethics, 9, 6.
4.
CzarkowskiM., & RozanowskiK. (2009). Polish research ethics committees in the European Union system of assessing medical experiments. Science and Engineering Ethics, 15, 201–212.
5.
DonabedianA. (1964). Evaluating the quality of medical care. Milbank Memorial Fund Quarterly: Health and Society, 44(3 Suppl), 166–206.
6.
FamenkaA. (2011). Ethical review of biomedical research in Belarus: Current status, problems and perspectives. Romanian Journal of Bioethics, 9(2), 74–83.
7.
FamenkaA. (2014, in preparation). Research ethics in the context of transition: An analysis of policies and programs on the protection of human research subjects in the selected countries of Central and Eastern Europe.
8.
GefenasE.DranseikaV.CekanauskaiteA.HugK.MezinskaS.PeiciusE. (2010). Non-equivalent stringency of ethical review in the Baltic states: A sign of a systematic problem in Europe?Journal of Medical Ethics, 36, 435–439.
9.
Fogarty International Center, National Institutes of Health (2013). International research ethics and curriculum development award. Retrieved from www.fic.nih.gov/programs/pages/bioethics.aspx.
HyderA. A.DawsonL.BachaniA. M., & LaveryJ. (2009). Moving from research ethics review to research ethics systems in low-income and middle-income countries. Lancet, 373, 862–865.
12.
KingdonJ. W. (1995). Agendas, alternatives, and public policies. New York: HarperCollins College.
13.
KubarO. (2010). The current state of bioethics education in the system of medical education in the CIS member states, pp. 24–26, 30–32. Saint Petersburg: Pasteur Institute.
SleemH.AbdelhaiR.Al-AbdallatI.Al-NaifM.GabrH.KehilE. (2010). Development of an accessible self-assessment tool for research ethics committees in developing countries. Journal of Empirical Research on Human Research Ethics, 5(3), 85–98.
18.
StrosbergM. A.GefenasE.LoueS., & PhilpottS. (2013). Building research ethics capacity in post-communist countries: The experience of two Fogarty training programs. Journal of Empirical Research on Human Research Ethics, 8, 28–39.
19.
ThompsonF. J. (1983). Health policy and the bureaucracy: Politics and implementation. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
20.
Transparency International (2012). Corruption Perceptions Index. Retrieved from www.transparency.org.
