4.3 Article

BrainNet Europe's Code of Conduct for brain banking

期刊

JOURNAL OF NEURAL TRANSMISSION
卷 122, 期 7, 页码 937-940

出版社

SPRINGER WIEN
DOI: 10.1007/s00702-014-1353-5

关键词

Bioethics; Brain autopsy; Brain bank; Informed consent; Biobanking; Neuropathology

资金

  1. European Community [LSHM-CT-2004-503039]
  2. MRC [G0900580, G0901945, MR/L016400/1, G0600953] Funding Source: UKRI
  3. Medical Research Council [G0901945, G0600953, G0900580, MR/L016400/1] Funding Source: researchfish
  4. Parkinson's UK [G-0909] Funding Source: researchfish

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Research utilizing human tissue and its removal at post-mortem has given rise to many controversies in the media and posed many dilemmas in the fields of law and ethics. The law often lacks clear instructions and unambiguous guidelines. The absence of a harmonized international legislation with regard to post-mortem medical procedures and donation of tissue and organs contributes to the complexity of the issue. Therefore, within the BrainNet Europe (BNE) consortium, a consortium of 19 European brain banks, we drafted an ethical Code of Conduct for brain banking that covers basic legal rules and bioethical principles involved in brain banking. Sources include laws, regulations and guidelines (Declarations, Conventions, Recommendations, Guidelines and Directives) issued by international key organizations, such as the Council of Europe, European Commission, World Medical Association and World Health Organization. The Code of Conduct addresses fundamental topics as the rights of the persons donating their tissue, the obligations of the brain bank with regard to respect and observance of such rights, informed consent, confidentiality, protection of personal data, collections of human biological material and their management, and transparency and accountability within the organization of a brain bank. The Code of Conduct for brain banking is being adopted by the BNE network prior to being enshrined in official legislation for brain banking in Europe and beyond.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.3
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据