Switch to: References

Add citations

You must login to add citations.
  1. Non-Beneficial Pediatric Research: Individual and Social Interests.Jan Piasecki, Marcin Waligora & Vilius Dranseika - 2015 - Medicine, Health Care and Philosophy 18 (1):103-112.
    Biomedical research involving human subjects is an arena of conflicts of interests. One of the most important conflicts is between interests of participants and interests of future patients. Legal regulations and ethical guidelines are instruments designed to help find a fair balance between risks and burdens taken by research subjects and development of knowledge and new treatment. There is an universally accepted ethical principle, which states that it is not ethically allowed to sacrifice individual interests for the sake of society (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   5 citations  
  • Shared Vulnerabilities in Research.Eric Chwang - 2014 - American Journal of Bioethics 14 (12):3-11.
    The U.S. Code of Federal Regulations governing federally funded research on human subjects assumes that harmful research is sometimes morally justifiable because the beneficiaries of that research share a particular vulnerability with its subjects. In this article, I argue against this assumption, which occurs in every subpart of the Code of Federal Regulations that deals with specific vulnerable populations . I argue that shared vulnerability is no exception to the general principle that harming one person in order to benefit another (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   8 citations  
  • Challenging Research on Human Subjects: Justice and Uncompensated Harms.Stephen Napier - 2013 - Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics 34 (1):29-51.
    Ethical challenges to certain aspects of research on human subjects are not uncommon; examples include challenges to first-in-human trials (Chapman in J Clin Res Bioethics 2(4):1–8, 2011), certain placebo controlled trials (Anderson in J Med Philos 31:65–81, 2006; Anderson and Kimmelman in Kennedy Inst Ethics J 20(1):75–98, 2010) and “sham” surgery (Macklin in N Engl J Med 341:992–996, 1999). To date, however, there are few challenges to research when the subjects are competent and the research is more than minimal risk (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • Are Positive Experiences of Children in Non-Therapeutic Research Justifiable Research Benefits?Mira S. Staphorst, Joke A. M. Hunfeld & Suzanne van de Vathorst - 2017 - Journal of Medical Ethics 43 (8):530-534.
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • Ethics of Treatment Interruption Trials in HIV Cure Research: Addressing the Conundrum of Risk/Benefit Assessment.Gail E. Henderson, Holly L. Peay, Eugene Kroon, Rosemary Jean Cadigan, Karen Meagher, Thidarat Jupimai, Adam Gilbertson, Jill Fisher, Nuchanart Q. Ormsby, Nitiya Chomchey, Nittaya Phanuphak, Jintanat Ananworanich & Stuart Rennie - forthcoming - Journal of Medical Ethics:medethics-2017-104433.
    Though antiretroviral therapy is the standard of care for people living with HIV, its treatment limitations, burdens, stigma and costs lead to continued interest in HIV cure research. Early-phase cure trials, particularly those that include analytic treatment interruption, involve uncertain and potentially high risk, with minimal chance of clinical benefit. Some question whether such trials should be offered, given the risk/benefit imbalance, and whether those who choose to participate are acting rationally. We address these questions through a longitudinal decision-making study (...)
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation