RISS 학술연구정보서비스

검색
다국어 입력

http://chineseinput.net/에서 pinyin(병음)방식으로 중국어를 변환할 수 있습니다.

변환된 중국어를 복사하여 사용하시면 됩니다.

예시)
  • 中文 을 입력하시려면 zhongwen을 입력하시고 space를누르시면됩니다.
  • 北京 을 입력하시려면 beijing을 입력하시고 space를 누르시면 됩니다.
닫기
    인기검색어 순위 펼치기

    RISS 인기검색어

      KCI등재

      인간대상연구에 있어 동의 관련 규범적 문제; 「생명윤리 및 안전에 관한 법률」 상의 동의 관련 규정을 중심으로 = Study on the provisions of the Bioethics and Safety Act related to obtaining informed consent for the human research : Focusing on the principal of obtaining informed consent and the allowance of exceptions to the principle

      한글로보기
      • 내보내기
      • 내책장담기
      • 공유하기
      • 오류접수

      부가정보

      다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)

      To obtain the written informed consent from the research participant after providing enough information and explaining about the research is the principle that has to be requested for observance on a global level as well as the duty of the researcher under the domestic law for the respect of the research participant`s autonomy and the protection of the research participant from the research risk. According to the amendment of the Bioethics and Safety Act, the scope of the human research regulated by this law has been extended to the human research that is to be conducted by the physical intervention, to be conducted through the interaction such as the communication physical contact or other means and to be conducted using the information with which individuals can be identified, so the type and the characteristics of the research has to be diversified considerably. Therefore, these changes have led to the occasional situation that the exceptions to the principle related to obtaining informed consent for the human research such as the exemption of obtaining informed consent and waiver or alternation of documentation of obtaining informed consent have to be allowed in legally to enable the research practically as well as to protect the privacy of the research participant and to ensure the confidentiality of the research participant. Already, the international norms such as the Declaration of Helsinki and WHO CIOMS Guideline have some provisions and contents to allow these exceptions. And both for the Institutional Review Board Members who have to review the research protocol and to decide the way to obtain informed consent from the research participant and the researcher who have to obtain informed consent from the research participant, US DHSS 45CFR46, especially Subpart A, has some provisions in which are specific standards to allow these exceptions. But, in the Bioethics and Safety Act, there are the clearly defined provisions related to researcher`s observance duty of the obtaining of informed consent, but there are not enough provisions providing a basis for the allowance of these exceptions. So, in this article, to find the problems, I consider the provisions of the Bioethics and Safety Act related to obtaining informed consent for the human research focusing on the principal of obtaining informed consent and the allowance of exceptions to the principle. And referring to the provisions and contents in the international norms and 45CFR46, I suggest the way to improve the provisions in the Bioethics and Safety Act for the allowance of exceptions to the principle of obtaining informed consent.
      번역하기

      To obtain the written informed consent from the research participant after providing enough information and explaining about the research is the principle that has to be requested for observance on a global level as well as the duty of the researcher ...

      To obtain the written informed consent from the research participant after providing enough information and explaining about the research is the principle that has to be requested for observance on a global level as well as the duty of the researcher under the domestic law for the respect of the research participant`s autonomy and the protection of the research participant from the research risk. According to the amendment of the Bioethics and Safety Act, the scope of the human research regulated by this law has been extended to the human research that is to be conducted by the physical intervention, to be conducted through the interaction such as the communication physical contact or other means and to be conducted using the information with which individuals can be identified, so the type and the characteristics of the research has to be diversified considerably. Therefore, these changes have led to the occasional situation that the exceptions to the principle related to obtaining informed consent for the human research such as the exemption of obtaining informed consent and waiver or alternation of documentation of obtaining informed consent have to be allowed in legally to enable the research practically as well as to protect the privacy of the research participant and to ensure the confidentiality of the research participant. Already, the international norms such as the Declaration of Helsinki and WHO CIOMS Guideline have some provisions and contents to allow these exceptions. And both for the Institutional Review Board Members who have to review the research protocol and to decide the way to obtain informed consent from the research participant and the researcher who have to obtain informed consent from the research participant, US DHSS 45CFR46, especially Subpart A, has some provisions in which are specific standards to allow these exceptions. But, in the Bioethics and Safety Act, there are the clearly defined provisions related to researcher`s observance duty of the obtaining of informed consent, but there are not enough provisions providing a basis for the allowance of these exceptions. So, in this article, to find the problems, I consider the provisions of the Bioethics and Safety Act related to obtaining informed consent for the human research focusing on the principal of obtaining informed consent and the allowance of exceptions to the principle. And referring to the provisions and contents in the international norms and 45CFR46, I suggest the way to improve the provisions in the Bioethics and Safety Act for the allowance of exceptions to the principle of obtaining informed consent.

      더보기

      참고문헌 (Reference)

      1 "약사법"

      2 보건복지부, "생명윤리법 관련 기관 운영지침"

      3 "생명윤리 및 안전에 관한 법률"

      4 "「의약품 등의 안전에 관한 규칙」및 [별표4 의약품 임상시험 관리기준]"

      5 "「의료기기법」및 동법 시행규칙 [별표2의2 의료기기 임상시험 관리기준]"

      6 "World Medical Association Declaration of Helsinki : Ethical Principles for Medical Research Involving Human Subjects" 2013

      7 "WHO Council for International Organizations of Medical Sciences International Ethical Guidelines for Biomedical Research Involving Human Subjects"

      8 Susan M. Labott, "Psychological and Social Risks of Behavioral Research" The Hastings Center 26 (26): 11-15, 2004

      9 National Research Council, "Proposed Revisions to the Common Rule for the Protection of Human Subjects in the Behavioral and Social Sciences" National Academy Press 45-49, 2014

      10 Joan E. Sieber, "Planning research: Basic ethical decision-making, Ethics in Research with Human Participants" American Psychological Association 13-26, 2000

      1 "약사법"

      2 보건복지부, "생명윤리법 관련 기관 운영지침"

      3 "생명윤리 및 안전에 관한 법률"

      4 "「의약품 등의 안전에 관한 규칙」및 [별표4 의약품 임상시험 관리기준]"

      5 "「의료기기법」및 동법 시행규칙 [별표2의2 의료기기 임상시험 관리기준]"

      6 "World Medical Association Declaration of Helsinki : Ethical Principles for Medical Research Involving Human Subjects" 2013

      7 "WHO Council for International Organizations of Medical Sciences International Ethical Guidelines for Biomedical Research Involving Human Subjects"

      8 Susan M. Labott, "Psychological and Social Risks of Behavioral Research" The Hastings Center 26 (26): 11-15, 2004

      9 National Research Council, "Proposed Revisions to the Common Rule for the Protection of Human Subjects in the Behavioral and Social Sciences" National Academy Press 45-49, 2014

      10 Joan E. Sieber, "Planning research: Basic ethical decision-making, Ethics in Research with Human Participants" American Psychological Association 13-26, 2000

      11 Folstein, Susan F., "Out of darkness: Contemporary perspectives on family violence" Sage Publications, Inc 271-281, 1997

      12 Elizabeth A, "Institutional Review Board Management and Functio n" Jones & Bartlett Pub 2006

      13 Elana Newman, "Ethical Issues in Trauma-Related Research: A Review" University of California Press 1 (1): 29-46, 2006

      14 "Code of Federal Regulations Title 45 Public Welfare Part 46 Protection of Human Subjects"

      15 Check, Devon K, "Certificates of Confidentiality and Informed Consent: Perspectives of IRB Chairs and Institutional Legal Counsel" The Hastings Center 36 (36): 1-8, 2014

      16 (재)국가생명윤리정책연구원, "(2013-15 기관위원회 시범평가) 기관위원회 평가인증기준 해설서 : 평가위원용"

      더보기

      동일학술지(권/호) 다른 논문

      동일학술지 더보기

      더보기

      분석정보

      View

      상세정보조회

      0

      Usage

      원문다운로드

      0

      대출신청

      0

      복사신청

      0

      EDDS신청

      0

      동일 주제 내 활용도 TOP

      더보기

      주제

      연도별 연구동향

      연도별 활용동향

      연관논문

      연구자 네트워크맵

      공동연구자 (7)

      유사연구자 (20) 활용도상위20명

      인용정보 인용지수 설명보기

      학술지 이력

      학술지 이력
      연월일 이력구분 이력상세 등재구분
      2027 평가예정 재인증평가 신청대상 (재인증)
      2021-01-01 평가 등재학술지 유지 (재인증) KCI등재
      2018-01-01 평가 등재학술지 유지 (등재유지) KCI등재
      2015-01-01 평가 등재학술지 유지 (등재유지) KCI등재
      2014-10-27 학술지명변경 외국어명 : 미등록 -> Journal of hongik law review KCI등재
      2011-01-01 평가 등재학술지 선정 (등재후보2차) KCI등재
      2010-01-01 평가 등재후보 1차 PASS (등재후보1차) KCI등재후보
      2008-01-01 평가 등재후보학술지 선정 (신규평가) KCI등재후보
      더보기

      학술지 인용정보

      학술지 인용정보
      기준연도 WOS-KCI 통합IF(2년) KCIF(2년) KCIF(3년)
      2016 0.59 0.59 0.61
      KCIF(4년) KCIF(5년) 중심성지수(3년) 즉시성지수
      0.6 0.59 0.693 0.42
      더보기

      이 자료와 함께 이용한 RISS 자료

      나만을 위한 추천자료

      해외이동버튼