Arancibia, MarceloMarceloArancibiaBorgeat, MarjorieMarjorieBorgeatMadrid, EvaEvaMadridXimena Luengo-Charath2025-08-252025-08-252018-04-2610.5867/medwave.2018.02.72082-s2.0-85054767322https://cris-uv-2.scimago.es/handle/123456789/3234WOS:000449159800012In 2016, the new edition of the Council for International Organizations of Medical Sciences (CIOMS) Ethical Guidelines was released, which are universally acknowledged as ethical standards in biomedical research. In this article, we critically analyze the improvements and shortcomings of the CIOMS Ethical Guidelines 2016. Among the improvements are the relevance assigned to the social value of research and its effects on decision-making and the creation of public policies; the research development in low-resources scenarios; the communities involvement in the research process; the determination of participants vulnerability and changes on informed consent related proceedings. Despite the improved harmonization with scientific, technologic and social changes, and that the guidelines provide a tool for researchers and members of research ethics committees alike, some topics remain unsolved, namely the management of participants minimal risk and conflicts of interest involved in research, and the development of research in low-incomes scenarios. Nonetheless, we recognize that these new guidelines constitute a progress regarding the context and needs of populations in which research will be conducted, with greater community involvement in the different phases of the investigation project, thus allowing them to access the potential benefits. The impact of the CIOMS Ethical Guidelines 2016, should be appraised over time, particularly in socio-sanitary inequities scenarios and in the context of commercial interests of industry on biomedical research.enacceso abiertoMedicine, General And InternalMedicinereview