A Critique of Clinical Equipoise: Therapeutic Misconception in the Ethics of Clinical Trials

Hastings Center Report 33 (3):19-28 (2003)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

A predominant ethical view holds that physician‐investigators should conduct their research with therapeutic intent. And since a physician offering a therapy wouldn't prescribe second‐rate treatments, the experimental intervention and the best proven therapy should appear equally effective. "Clinical equipoise" is necessary. But this perspective is flawed. The ethics of research and of therapy are fundamentally different, and clinical equipoise should be abandoned.

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 94,593

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Analytics

Added to PP
2013-11-22

Downloads
66 (#243,230)

6 months
17 (#204,912)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Franklin Miller
Columbia University

Citations of this work

Rescuing the Duty to Rescue.Tina Rulli & Joseph Millum - 2014 - Journal of Medical Ethics:1-5.
Rescuing the duty to rescue.Tina Rulli & Joseph Millum - 2016 - Journal of Medical Ethics 42 (4):260-264.

View all 123 citations / Add more citations

References found in this work

No references found.

Add more references