Procedures for the ethical review of public health surveillance protocols



The present commentary is based on the following considerations:
1) for the purposes of authorisation, a distinction is drawn between “research” and “intervention”. The procedures for authorising the former are more complex, the relevant controls are stricter and approval has to be granted by a Research Ethics Committee (REC);
2) although the debate is still open, it is barely credible to claim that public health surveillance is not a form of research. It should, therefore, be subject to rigorous ethical assessment;
3) when addressing specifically the issue of surveillance, it would be appropriate to shift the focus of attention from the type of procedure (research/intervention) to the risk implied in that procedure;
4) much emphasis has hitherto been placed on the risks that public health surveillance may imply for the protection of personal data;
5) the emphasis on the protection of personal data is frequently excessive and the risks should be examined in a broader context.



Share on



Carlo Petrini

How to Cite
Petrini, C. (2014). Procedures for the ethical review of public health surveillance protocols. Annali dell’Istituto Superiore Di Sanità, 50(1), 1–3. Retrieved from
  • Abstract viewed - 324 times