Characterizing the Population in Clinical Trials: Barriers, Comparability, and Implications for Review
David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
The definition of the study population for a clinical trial via the criteria for trial eligibility has implications for the validity of the study and its applicability to clinical practice. Though issues of equity regarding the selection of subjects for research have long been a concern of ethicists, issues regarding the impact of subject selection on a trial's generalizability have only recently attracted ethical scrutiny. After a review of the history of the ethics of subject selection, I focus on three empirical questions regarding the generalizability of clinical trials. (1) What proportion of diseased populations are studied in clinical trials? (2) How are subjects selected for clinical trial participation (and what are the main barriers to participation)? (3) Are clinical trial participants comparable to non-participants? Finally, the role of the Institutional Review Board--Research Ethics Board in Canada--in assessing the generalizability of clinical research is discussed.
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
No categories specified
(categorize this paper)
|Through your library||Only published papers are available at libraries|
Similar books and articles
Charles Weijer, Selecting Subjects for Participation in Clinical Research: An Empirical Inquiry and Ethical Analysis.
Bernard Lo & Lindsay Parham (2010). Resolving Ethical Issues in Stem Cell Clinical Trials: The Example of Parkinson Disease. Journal of Law, Medicine and Ethics 38 (2):257-266.
Stanley H. Shapiro, Charles Weijer & Benjamin Freedman, Reporting the Study Populations of Clinical Trials. Clear Transmission or Static on the Line?
Charles Weijer (1999). Selecting Subjects for Participation in Clinical Research: One Sphere of Justice. Journal of Medical Ethics 25 (1):31-36.
Maurie Markman (2004). The Research Misconception. International Journal of Applied Philosophy 18 (2):241-252.
Lynn A. Jansen (2005). A Closer Look at the Bad Deal Trial: Beyond Clinical Equipoise. Hastings Center Report 35 (5):29-36.
Mark Sheehan & Steve Clarke (2009). The Duty to Disclose Adverse Clinical Trial Results. American Journal of Bioethics 9 (8):24 - 32.
S. Matthew Liao, Mark Sheehan & Steve Clarke (2009). The Duty to Disclose Adverse Clinical Trial Results. American Journal of Bioethics 9 (8):24-32.
Margaret B. Liu (2010). A Clinical Trials Manual From the Duke Clinical Research Institute: Lessons From a Horse Named Jim. Wiley-Blackwell.
Marcin Waligora (2013). A European Consistency for Functioning of RECs? We Just Lost Our Chance. Journal of Medical Ethics 39 (6):408-409.
Charles Weijer, Benjamin Freedman, Abraham Fuks, James Robbins, Stanley Shapiro & Myriam Skrutkowska, What Difference Does It Make to Be Treated in a Clinical Trial? A Pilot Study.
Dorota Switula (2000). Principles of Good Clinical Practice (GCP) in Clinical Research. Science and Engineering Ethics 6 (1):71-77.
Audrey R. Chapman & Courtney C. Scala (2012). Evaluating the First-in-Human Clinical Trial of a Human Embryonic Stem Cell-Based Therapy. Kennedy Institute of Ethics Journal 22 (3):243-261.
Added to index2010-09-08
Total downloads7 ( #147,371 of 1,012,421 )
Recent downloads (6 months)2 ( #39,218 of 1,012,421 )
How can I increase my downloads?