Literature DB >> 20054011

Clinical research in context: reexamining the distinction between research and practice.

James A Anderson1.   

Abstract

At least since the seminal work of the (US) National Commission for the Protection of Human Subjects of Biomedical and Behavioral Research in the 1970s, a fundamental distinction between research and practice has underwritten both conceptual work in research ethics and regulations governing research involving human subjects. Notwithstanding its undoubted historical importance, I believe the distinction is problematic because it misrepresents clinical inquiry. In this essay, I aim to clarify the character of clinical inquiry by identifying crucial contextual constraints on justification constitutive of clinical science. This analysis shows that, from an epistemological point of view, clinical research and clinical practice are not sharply distinct but intimately intertwined. This result is important in its own right-an enriched understanding of the epistemology of clinical research is valuable in and of itself. But this result is also important because it has profound implications for the ethics of human subjects research.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2010        PMID: 20054011     DOI: 10.1093/jmp/jhp054

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Med Philos        ISSN: 0360-5310


  2 in total

1.  The fiduciary obligation of the physician-researcher in phase IV trials.

Authors:  Rosemarie D L C Bernabe; Ghislaine J M W van Thiel; Jan A M Raaijmakers; Johannes J M van Delden
Journal:  BMC Med Ethics       Date:  2014-02-07       Impact factor: 2.652

2.  What do international ethics guidelines say in terms of the scope of medical research ethics?

Authors:  Rosemarie D L C Bernabe; Ghislaine J M W van Thiel; Johannes J M van Delden
Journal:  BMC Med Ethics       Date:  2016-04-26       Impact factor: 2.652

  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.