Should Society Allow Research Ethics Boards to Be Run as For-Profit Enterprises?

Abstract

This article is framed as a debate between Ezekiel J. Emanuel on one side and Trudo Lemmens and Carl Elliot on the other. Dr. Emanuel takes the position that for-profit research ethics boards, mandated to review the ethics of clinical trials, are no less credible than not-for-profit bodies; he argues that the focus should be on the quality of each board's work rather than whether they are for-profit or not. On the other side, Professors Lemmens and Elliot, while recognizing that institutional research ethics boards are also confronted with conflicts of interest, argue that for-profit review boards will inevitably face conflicts of interest, as their board members are paid by the very companies that have financial interests in gaining board approval. They discuss how these conflicts are particularly problematic in light of the weak regulatory structure surrounding these boards.