Order:
  1. Health Research Priority Setting: The Duties of Individual Funders.Leah Pierson & Joseph Millum - 2018 - American Journal of Bioethics 18 (11):6-17.
    The vast majority of health research resources are used to study conditions that affect a small, advantaged portion of the global population. This distribution has been widely criticized as inequitable and threatens to exacerbate health disparities. However, there has been little systematic work on what individual health research funders ought to do in response. In this article, we analyze the general and special duties of research funders to the different populations that might benefit from health research. We assess how these (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   16 citations  
  2.  18
    Disease Prevalence and the Magnitude of Research Benefits.Leah Pierson & Joseph Millum - 2018 - American Journal of Bioethics 18 (4):73-74.
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  3. Health Research Priority Setting: Do Grant Review Processes Reflect Ethical Principles?Leah Pierson & Joseph Millum - forthcoming - Global Public Health.
    Most public and non-profit organisations that fund health research provide the majority of their funding in the form of grants. The calls for grant applications are often untargeted, such that a wide variety of applications may compete for the same funding. The grant review process therefore plays a critical role in determining how limited research resources are allocated. Despite this, little attention has been paid to whether grant review criteria align with widely endorsed ethical criteria for allocating health research resources. (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  4.  17
    The limits of research institutions in setting research priorities.Leah Pierson & Joseph Millum - 2017 - Journal of Medical Ethics 43 (12):810-811.
    In When Clinical Trials Compete: Prioritizing Study Recruitment, Gelinas et al tackle an important issue—study non-completion—and draw conclusions with which we largely agree. Most importantly, we accept that setting priorities among competing research studies is necessary and should be informed by ethical analysis. We disagree with the conclusion of Gelinas et al that this priority setting should take place at the level of the individual research institution. At a minimum, they should consider other actors who might be better suited for (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  5.  98
    Allocation of scarce biospecimens for use in research.Leah Pierson, Sophia Gibert, Benjamin Berkman, Marion Danis & Joseph Millum - 2021 - Journal of Medical Ethics 47 (11):740-743.
    Hundreds of millions of rare biospecimens are stored in laboratories and biobanks around the world. Often, the researchers who possess these specimens do not plan to use them, while other researchers limit the scope of their work because they cannot acquire biospecimens that meet their needs. This situation raises an important and underexplored question: how should scientists allocate biospecimens that they do not intend to use? We argue that allocators should aim to maximise the social value of the research enterprise (...)
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  6. Response to Open Peer Commentaries on “Health Research Priority Setting: The Duties of Individual Funders”.Leah Pierson & Joseph Millum - 2019 - American Journal of Bioethics 19 (1):W5-W7.
    We respond to open peer commentaries on our target article, "Health Research Priority Setting: The Duties of Individual Funders".
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark