Belmont report


Also found in: Wikipedia.

Belmont report

A national commission that promulgated the basic ethical guidelines and principles for human research in the U.S.
References in periodicals archive ?
In the United States the central hub of human research protections is The Belmont Report of 1979.
In the coming weeks, new light will be shed on this scandal when the district's chief auditor, Don Mullinax, issues his second Belmont report, which is expected to outline the school's financing.
Regardless of country, Quintiles strictly adheres to ethical principles articulated by international guidelines such as ICH, the Declaration of Helsinki, CIOMS and The Belmont Report.
The National Research Act authorized the National Commission for the Protection of Human Subjects of Biomedical and Behavioral Research, which held hearings and drafted papers from 1974 to 1978 before releasing the Belmont Report in 1979.
One of the most significant is The Belmont Report of 1979.
22, Miller is to assemble a crisis management team and recommend punishments for the officials singled out for discipline in the Belmont report.
Eighty-one percent of respondents were not aware of safeguards like the Declaration of Helsinki, The Belmont Report, Institutional Review Boards (IRBs) and the informed consent process.
1) The principles are very similar to those of the Belmont Report, the 1979 report by the National Commission for the Protection of Human Subjects of Biomedical and Behavioral Research.
In the Belmont report, LAUSD auditor Don Mullinax blamed the district's senior administrators, the project's developer and several consultants for letting the school be built atop an oil field plagued by potentially explosive and deadly gases.
Reading the reflections of the founding figures--Beauchamp on The Belmont Report, Childress on The Principles of Biomedical Ethics, Engelhardt on the evolution of The Foundations of Bioethics, Veatch on A Theory of Medical Ethics--it becomes evident that the "watchdog" role into which critics cast bioethicists was never envisioned by these founding thinkers (which may explain why recent demands for "professional standards of accountability" came as a surprise to many in the field).
However, the Belmont report and Rohman report both cite the actions of many of the same officials, including Wong; another former Environmental Health and Safety Branch director, Diane Doi; and Real Estate and Asset Management Branch director Robert Niccum.
Bioethicists from the United States should take note: neither the Belmont Report nor the Federal Common Rule mentions human rights.