- Abstract:
-
In response to increasing concerns regarding inconsistency in the decision-making of institutional review boards (IRBs), we introduce the decision-maker's dilemma, which arises when complex, normative decisions must be made regularly. Those faced with such decisions can either develop a process of algorithmic decision-making, in which consistency is ensured but many morally relevant factors are excluded from the process, or embrace discretionary decision-making, which makes space for morally ...
Expand abstract - Publication status:
- Published
- Peer review status:
- Peer reviewed
- Publisher:
- Wiley Publisher's website
- Journal:
- Ethics and Human Research Journal website
- Volume:
- 41
- Issue:
- 4
- Pages:
- 2-14
- Publication date:
- 2019-07-23
- Acceptance date:
- 2019-01-30
- DOI:
- EISSN:
-
2578-2363
- ISSN:
-
2578-2355
- Pmid:
-
31336039
- Pubs id:
-
pubs:1035702
- UUID:
-
uuid:67bedf74-9680-420b-9e33-02d63d164a01
- Source identifiers:
-
1035702
- Local pid:
- pubs:1035702
- Language:
- English
- Keywords:
- Copyright holder:
- Hastings Center
- Copyright date:
- 2019
- Rights statement:
- © 2019 by The Hastings Center. All rights reserved.
- Notes:
- This is the accepted manuscript version of the article. The final version is available from Wiley at: https://doi.org/10.1002/eahr.500022
Journal article
Should the decisions of institutional review boards be consistent?
Actions
Authors
Funding
Bibliographic Details
Item Description
Terms of use
Metrics
Altmetrics
Dimensions
If you are the owner of this record, you can report an update to it here: Report update to this record