David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
American Journal of Bioethics 8 (4):24 – 31 (2008)
Pragmatism is a distinctive approach to clinical research ethics that can guide bioethicists and members of institutional review boards (IRBs) as they struggle to balance the competing values of promoting medical research and protecting human subjects participating in it. After defining our understanding of pragmatism in the setting of clinical research ethics, we show how a pragmatic approach can provide guidance not only for the day-to-day functioning of the IRB, but also for evaluation of policy standards, such as the one that addresses acceptable risks for healthy children in clinical research trials. We also show how pragmatic considerations might influence the debate about the use of deception in clinical research. Finally, we show how a pragmatic approach, by regarding the promotion of human research and the protection of human subjects as equally important values, helps to break down the false dichotomy between science and ethics in clinical research.
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
|Through your library|
References found in this work BETA
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
Daniel Goldberg (2008). Pragmatism and Virtue Ethics in Clinical Research. American Journal of Bioethics 8 (4):43 – 45.
A. M. Viens (2008). Towards a Reasons-Based Pragmatic Ethical Framework. American Journal of Bioethics 8 (4):41 – 43.
D. Micah Hester, Joseph Brown & Toby Schonfeld (2008). Pragmatism, Principles, and Protection. American Journal of Bioethics 8 (4):32 – 34.
Jim McCambridge, Kypros Kypri, Preben Bendtsen & John Porter (2013). The Use of Deception in Public Health Behavioral Intervention Trials: A Case Study of Three Online Alcohol Trials. American Journal of Bioethics 13 (11):39-47.
Jim McCambridge, Kypros Kypri, Preben Bendtsen & John Porter (2014). Deception in Research Is Morally Problematic … and so Too Is Not Using It Morally: Reply to Open Peer Commentaries on “The Use of Deception in Public Health Behavioral Intervention Trials: A Case Study of Three Online Alcohol Trials”. American Journal of Bioethics 14 (1):W9 - W12.
Similar books and articles
Alan Wertheimer (2010). Rethinking the Ethics of Clinical Research: Widening the Lens. Oxford University Press.
Ezekiel J. Emanuel (ed.) (2003). Ethical and Regulatory Aspects of Clinical Research: Readings and Commentary. Johns Hopkins University Press.
Ezekiel J. Emanuel (ed.) (2008). The Oxford Textbook of Clinical Research Ethics. Oxford University Press.
Margaret B. Liu (2010). A Clinical Trials Manual From the Duke Clinical Research Institute: Lessons From a Horse Named Jim. Wiley-Blackwell.
Jeremy Sugarman (2004). Using Empirical Data to Inform the Ethical Evaluation of Placebo Controlled Trials. Science and Engineering Ethics 10 (1):29-35.
Steven Joffe & Franklin G. Miller (2008). Bench to Bedside: Mapping the Moral Terrain of Clinical Research. Hastings Center Report 38 (2):30-42.
Patricia Spitzig (2010). Clinical Study Reflections: Another View. Science and Engineering Ethics 16 (4):705-711.
Danielle Laudy (2009). End of Life Pediatric Research: What About the Ethics? [REVIEW] Journal of Academic Ethics 7 (1-2):87-91.
Marion Danis (ed.) (2012). Clinical Research Consultation: A Casebook. Oxford University Press.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads62 ( #35,388 of 1,696,507 )
Recent downloads (6 months)8 ( #69,748 of 1,696,507 )
How can I increase my downloads?