Literature DB >> 17847602

Re-evaluating the therapeutic misconception: response to Miller and Joffe.

Paul S Appelbaum1, Charles W Lidz.   

Abstract

Responding to the paper by Miller and Joffe, we review the development of the concept of therapeutic misconception (TM). Our concerns about TM's impact on informed consent do not derive from the belief that research subjects have poorer outcomes than persons receiving ordinary clinical care. Rather, we believe that subjects with TM cannot give an adequate informed consent to research participation, which harms their dignitary interests and their abilities to make meaningful decisions. Ironically, Miller and Joffe's approach ends up largely embracing the very position that they inaccurately attribute to us: the belief that, with some exceptions, it is only the prospect of poorer outcomes that should motivate efforts to dispel TM. In the absence of empirical studies on the steps required to dispel TM and the impact of such procedures on subject recruitment, it is premature to surrender to the belief that TM must be widely tolerated in clinical research.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2006        PMID: 17847602     DOI: 10.1353/ken.2006.0021

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Kennedy Inst Ethics J        ISSN: 1054-6863


  12 in total

Review 1.  Ethical concerns about non-active conditions in smoking cessation trials and methods to decrease such concerns.

Authors:  John R Hughes
Journal:  Drug Alcohol Depend       Date:  2008-12-06       Impact factor: 4.492

2.  The therapeutic misconception: not just for patients.

Authors:  Dana J Lawrence
Journal:  J Can Chiropr Assoc       Date:  2008-08

3.  Ethics of clinical research with mentally ill persons.

Authors:  Hanfried Helmchen
Journal:  Eur Arch Psychiatry Clin Neurosci       Date:  2012-01-03       Impact factor: 5.270

4.  Therapeutic misconception, misestimation, and optimism in participants enrolled in phase 1 trials.

Authors:  Rebecca D Pentz; Margaret White; R Donald Harvey; Zachary Luke Farmer; Yuan Liu; Colleen Lewis; Olga Dashevskaya; Taofeek Owonikoko; Fadlo R Khuri
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  2012-01-31       Impact factor: 6.860

Review 5.  Therapeutic misconception: hope, trust and misconception in paediatric research.

Authors:  Simon Woods; Lynn E Hagger; Pauline McCormack
Journal:  Health Care Anal       Date:  2014-03

6.  What research ethics should learn from genomics and society research: lessons from the ELSI Congress of 2011.

Authors:  Gail E Henderson; Eric T Juengst; Nancy M P King; Kristine Kuczynski; Marsha Michie
Journal:  J Law Med Ethics       Date:  2012       Impact factor: 1.718

Review 7.  [Ethical questions in clinical research with the mentally ill].

Authors:  H Helmchen
Journal:  Nervenarzt       Date:  2008-09       Impact factor: 1.214

8.  Ethical aspects in tissue research: thematic analysis of ethical statements to the research ethics committee.

Authors:  Arja Halkoaho; Anna-Maija Pietilä; Mari Vesalainen; Kirsi Vähäkangas
Journal:  BMC Med Ethics       Date:  2012-08-08       Impact factor: 2.652

9.  Why is therapeutic misconception so prevalent?

Authors:  Charles W Lidz; Karen Albert; Paul Appelbaum; Laura B Dunn; Eve Overton; Ekaterina Pivovarova
Journal:  Camb Q Healthc Ethics       Date:  2015-04       Impact factor: 1.566

10.  Ethical issues in naturalistic versus controlled trials.

Authors:  Hanfried Helmchen
Journal:  Dialogues Clin Neurosci       Date:  2011       Impact factor: 5.986

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.