• 主题
高级搜索  >
历史搜索 清空历史
首页> 外文期刊>Pathobiology: journal of immunopathology, molecular and cellular biology >A case study on the proper use of human tissues for biomedical research at an academic pathology institution in Switzerland.
【24h】

A case study on the proper use of human tissues for biomedical research at an academic pathology institution in Switzerland.

机译：在瑞士的一家学术病理机构中进行了有关人体组织正确用于生物医学研究的案例研究。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           
页面导航
  • 摘要
  • 著录项
  • 相似文献
  • 相关主题

摘要

Any academic pathologist will sooner or later be confronted with the need to use human tissues for quality control purposes or for research projects or else with the demand for human tissue samples for research projects of external researchers. Over the last 10 years, the use of human tissues for such non-diagnostic purposes has been the subject of extensive debate and wide-reaching regulations. In particular, questions of medical secrecy, safety, autonomy and anonymization have been addressed, and the role of ethical review boards defined. However, these guidelines are not uniform in all countries and unfortunately tend to suffer from a certain lack of precision, which may in part be due to the fact that they are usually edited by multiple authors with quite diverse backgrounds (physicians, lawyers, ethicists, philosophers, anthropologists, theologists or lay persons, for example). The wide spectrum of interpretations of such regulations may be embarrassing to such an extent that a continuation of academic activities with human tissues appears to many pathologists as almost impossible or even outright illegal. This paper describes a set of characteristic, recurrent situations to which an academic pathologist may be confronted and proposes simple, realistic solutions that are nevertheless in line with most current regulations. Copyright (c) 2007 S. Karger AG, Basel.
机译：任何学术病理学家迟早都会面临将人体组织用于质量控制目的或用于研究项目的需求，或者需要外部人体研究项目的人体组织样品的需求。在过去的十年中，将人类组织用于这种非诊断目的一直是广泛辩论和广泛法规的主题。特别是，医疗保密性，安全性，自治性和匿名性等问题已得到解决，伦理审查委员会的作用也得到了定义。但是，这些指南并非在所有国家/地区都统一，并且不幸地会因缺乏一定的精确度而受到影响，这可能部分是由于这些指南通常由背景各异的多位作者（医生，律师，伦理学家，例如哲学家，人类学家，神学家或非专业人士。对此类法规的广泛解释可能会令人尴尬，以至于继续进行人体组织的学术活动在许多病理学家看来几乎是不可能的，甚至是完全非法的。本文介绍了一组病理病理学家可能会遇到的特征性反复发作情况，并提出了简单，现实的解决方案，但这些解决方案仍符合大多数当前法规。版权所有（c）2007 S.Karger AG，巴塞尔。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱：kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备：11010802029741号 ICP备案号：京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有

  • 客服微信

  • 服务号