Literature DB >> 10819955

What makes clinical research ethical?

E J Emanuel1, D Wendler, C Grady.   

Abstract

Many believe that informed consent makes clinical research ethical. However, informed consent is neither necessary nor sufficient for ethical clinical research. Drawing on the basic philosophies underlying major codes, declarations, and other documents relevant to research with human subjects, we propose 7 requirements that systematically elucidate a coherent framework for evaluating the ethics of clinical research studies: (1) value-enhancements of health or knowledge must be derived from the research; (2) scientific validity-the research must be methodologically rigorous; (3) fair subject selection-scientific objectives, not vulnerability or privilege, and the potential for and distribution of risks and benefits, should determine communities selected as study sites and the inclusion criteria for individual subjects; (4) favorable risk-benefit ratio-within the context of standard clinical practice and the research protocol, risks must be minimized, potential benefits enhanced, and the potential benefits to individuals and knowledge gained for society must outweigh the risks; (5) independent review-unaffiliated individuals must review the research and approve, amend, or terminate it; (6) informed consent-individuals should be informed about the research and provide their voluntary consent; and (7) respect for enrolled subjects-subjects should have their privacy protected, the opportunity to withdraw, and their well-being monitored. Fulfilling all 7 requirements is necessary and sufficient to make clinical research ethical. These requirements are universal, although they must be adapted to the health, economic, cultural, and technological conditions in which clinical research is conducted. JAMA. 2000;283:2701-2711.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Analytical Approach; Biomedical and Behavioral Research

Mesh:

Year:  2000        PMID: 10819955     DOI: 10.1001/jama.283.20.2701

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  JAMA        ISSN: 0098-7484            Impact factor:   56.272


  499 in total

1.  Evidence-based medicine: worship of form and treatment of high blood pressure.

Authors:  B M Psaty; C Rhoads; C D Furberg
Journal:  J Gen Intern Med       Date:  2000-10       Impact factor: 5.128

2.  Research ethics.

Authors:  Henk A M J ten Have
Journal:  Med Health Care Philos       Date:  2003

Review 3.  Ethical Considerations of Patient-Funded Research for Multiple Sclerosis Therapeutics.

Authors:  Lilyana Amezcua; Flavia Nelson
Journal:  Neurotherapeutics       Date:  2017-10       Impact factor: 7.620

4.  Alteplase for stroke. Uncertainty remains about efficacy.

Authors:  Howard Mann
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2002-06-29

Review 5.  Ethical considerations in psychopharmacological research involving decisionally impaired subjects.

Authors:  Donald L Rosenstein; Franklin G Miller
Journal:  Psychopharmacology (Berl)       Date:  2003-05-28       Impact factor: 4.530

Review 6.  Sham surgery controls: intracerebral grafting of fetal tissue for Parkinson's disease and proposed criteria for use of sham surgery controls.

Authors:  R L Albin
Journal:  J Med Ethics       Date:  2002-10       Impact factor: 2.903

7.  Disclosure in research ethics.

Authors:  Howard Mann
Journal:  CMAJ       Date:  2002-09-17       Impact factor: 8.262

8.  Factors associated with research wrongdoing in Nigeria.

Authors:  Omokhoa A Adeleye; Clement A Adebamowo
Journal:  J Empir Res Hum Res Ethics       Date:  2012-12       Impact factor: 1.742

9.  Social Benefits of Human Subjects Research.

Authors:  David B Resnik
Journal:  J Clin Res Best Pract       Date:  2008-11-01

Review 10.  De vuelta a la clínica: sin justificación no existe pregunta de investigación que valga.

Authors:  Juan O Talavera; Rodolfo Rivas-Ruiz; Marcela Pérez-Rodríguez; Ivonne Analí Roy-Garcia; Lino Palacios-Cruz
Journal:  Gac Med Mex       Date:  2019       Impact factor: 0.302

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.