David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Journal of Medical Ethics 34 (4):303-307 (2008)
Objectives: Bronchoalveolar lavage obtained at bronchoscopy is useful for research on pulmonary defence mechanisms. Bronchoscopy involves some discomfort and risk to subjects. We audited the process of consent, experienced adverse effects and reasons for participation among research bronchoscopy volunteers.Design: 100 consecutive volunteer research subjects attending for bronchoscopy, repeat bronchoscopy or routine recruitment clinic were interviewed. Information was gathered about volunteer motivation, perception of the consent process and adverse effects of bronchoscopy. Suggestions for improvement were requested. Responses were themed by a second investigator prior to data analysis.Results: 81 bronchoscopy-experienced subjects and 19 new volunteers were interviewed. 19 subjects reported adverse symptoms during or after bronchoscopy, but no symptoms were of sufficient severity that they would not repeat the procedure. The frequency of symptoms was not related to gender, the quality of the lavage or the HIV status of the subject. 76 subjects reported that the information given pre-procedure was useful and adequate but 43 had further questions mostly relating to their own results. The reasons given for research participation were access to health assessment , access to treatment when ill , desire to participate in research and remuneration . 7 subjects complained that the remuneration was inadequate.Conclusions: The main incentive to participation in research bronchoscopy was access to healthcare. Informed consent and procedure technique were adequate but subjects would value more feedback about individual and project results
|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
No citations found.
Similar books and articles
Keith Bauer (2004). Covert Video Surveillance of Parents Suspected of Child Abuse: The British Experience and Alternative Approaches. [REVIEW] Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics 25 (4):311-327.
Richard P. Nielsen (2000). Do Internal Due Process System Permit Adequate Political and Moral Space for Ethics Voice, Praxis, and Community? Journal of Business Ethics 24 (1):1 - 27.
Nathan Emmerich (2013). For an Ethnomethodology of Healthcare Ethics. Health Care Analysis 21 (4):372-389.
Kate Cregan (2012). Regulating Ethics in Australian Healthcare Research. Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics 21 (03):384-390.
Donnie J. Self & Joy D. Skeel (1992). Facilitating Healthcare Ethics Research: Assessement of Moral Reasoning and Moral Orientation From a Single Interview. Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics 1 (04):371-.
Michel Roth (2010). “Liberty, Solidarity, Fairness”: A Personal View of the French Healthcare System. Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics 19 (03):329-333.
M. Joseph Sirgy, Dong-Jin Lee & Grace B. Yu (2011). Consumer Sovereignty in Healthcare: Fact or Fiction? [REVIEW] Journal of Business Ethics 101 (3):459-474.
Blake E. Ashforth & Raymond T. Lee (1989). The Perceived Legitimacy of Managerial Influence: A Twenty-Five Year Comparison. [REVIEW] Journal of Business Ethics 8 (4):231 - 242.
Ezekiel J. Emanuel & Christine Grady (2006). Four Paradigms of Clinical Research and Research Oversight. Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics 16 (01):82-96.
Annemiek Richters (2002). When Ethics, Healthcare, and Human Rights Conflict: Mental Healthcare for Asylum Seekers. Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics 11 (03):304-318.
Hang-Yue Ngo, Sharon Foley, Angela Wong & Raymond Loi (2003). Who Gets More of the Pie? Predictors of Perceived Gender Inequity at Work. Journal of Business Ethics 45 (3):227 - 241.
Oxford Uehiro Centre for Practical Ethics, Chimeras Statement-the Case to Permit Hybrid/Chimera Research.
Ken W. Parry & Sarah B. Proctor-Thomson (2002). Perceived Integrity of Transformational Leaders in Organisational Settings. Journal of Business Ethics 35 (2):75 - 96.
Mohsin Raza (2005). Collaborative Healthcare Research: Some Ethical Considerations. Science and Engineering Ethics 11 (2):177-186.
Lawrence J. Rhoades (2002). Beyond Conflict of Interest: The Responsible Conduct of Research. Science and Engineering Ethics 8 (3):459-468.
Sorry, there are not enough data points to plot this chart.
Added to index2010-08-24
Recent downloads (6 months)0
How can I increase my downloads?