Comparative effectiveness research: what to do when experts disagree about risks

BMC Medical Ethics 18 (1):42 (2017)

Ethical issues related to comparative effectiveness research, or research that compares existing standards of care, have recently received considerable attention. In this paper we focus on how Ethics Review Committees should evaluate the risks of comparative effectiveness research. We discuss what has been a prominent focus in the debate about comparative effectiveness research, namely that it is justified when “nothing is known” about the comparative effectiveness of the available alternatives. We argue that this focus may be misleading. Rather, we should focus on the fact that some experts believe that the evidence points in favor of one intervention, whereas other experts believe that the evidence favors the alternative. We will then introduce a case that illustrates this point, and based on that, discuss how ERCs should deal with such cases of expert disagreement. We argue that ERCs have a duty to assess the range of expert opinions and based on that assessment arrive at a risk judgment about the study under consideration. We also argue that assessment of expert disagreement is important for the assignment of risk level to a clinical trial: what is the basis for expert opinions, how strong is the evidence appealed to by various experts, and how can clinical trial monitoring affect the possible increased risk of clinical trial participation.
Keywords No keywords specified (fix it)
Categories No categories specified
(categorize this paper)
DOI 10.1186/s12910-017-0202-0
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Translate to english
Revision history

Download options

Our Archive

Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy     Papers currently archived: 44,419
Through your library

References found in this work BETA

Equipoise and the Criteria for Reasonable Action.Emily L. Evans & Alex John London - 2006 - Journal of Law, Medicine and Ethics 34 (2):441-450.

Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

Add more citations

Similar books and articles

Valuing Risk: The Ethical Review of Clinical Trial Safety.Jonathan Kimmelman - 2004 - Kennedy Institute of Ethics Journal 14 (4):369-393.
When Expert Disagreement Supports the Consensus.Finnur Dellsén - 2018 - Australasian Journal of Philosophy 96 (1):142-156.
What is Clinical Effectiveness?R. Ashcroft - 2002 - Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part C 33 (2):219-233.
Ethics of Expert Evidence.Stephan Millett - 2013 - Australian Law Journal 87 (9):628-638.


Added to PP index

Total views
9 ( #784,576 of 2,271,941 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
2 ( #562,954 of 2,271,941 )

How can I increase my downloads?


My notes

Sign in to use this feature