21 found
Order:
See also
  1.  15
    A Radical Approach to Ebola: Saving Humans and Other Animals.Sarah J. L. Edwards, Charles H. Norell, Phyllis Illari, Brendan Clarke & Carolyn P. Neuhaus - 2018 - American Journal of Bioethics 18 (10):35-42.
    As the usual regulatory framework did not fit well during the last Ebola outbreak, innovative thinking still needed. In the absence of an outbreak, randomised controlled trials of clinical efficacy in humans cannot be done, while during an outbreak such trials will continue to face significant practical, philosophical, and ethical challenges. This article argues that researchers should also test the safety and effectiveness of novel vaccines in wild apes by employing a pluralistic approach to evidence. There are three reasons to (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   6 citations  
  2.  14
    Assessing the Remedy: The Case for Contracts in Clinical Trials.Sarah J. L. Edwards - 2011 - American Journal of Bioethics 11 (4):3-12.
    Current orthodoxy in research ethics assumes that subjects of clinical trials reserve rights to withdraw at any time and without giving any reason. This view sees the right to withdraw as a simple extension of the right to refuse to participate all together. In this paper, however, I suggest that subjects should assume some responsibilities for the internal validity of the trial at consent and that these responsibilities should be captured by contract. This would allow the researcher to impose a (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   13 citations  
  3.  13
    Research Ethics Committees: Differences and Moral Judgement.Sarah J. L. Edwards, Richard Ashcroft & Simon Kirchin - 2004 - Bioethics 18 (5):408–427.
  4.  21
    Research Participation and the Right to Withdraw.Sarah J. L. Edwards - 2005 - Bioethics 19 (2):112–130.
  5.  12
    Restricted Treatments, Inducements, and Research Participation.Sarah J. L. Edwards - 2006 - Bioethics 20 (2):77–91.
  6.  79
    Hard Paternalism, Fairness and Clinical Research: Why Not?Sarah J. L. Edwards & James Wilson - 2012 - Bioethics 26 (2):68 - 75.
    Jansen and Wall suggest a new way of defending hard paternalism in clinical research. They argue that non-therapeutic research exposing people to more than minimal risk should be banned on egalitarian grounds: in preventing poor decision-makers from making bad decisions, we will promote equality of welfare. We argue that their proposal is flawed for four reasons.First, the idea of poor decision-makers is much more problematic than Jansen and Wall allow. Second, pace Jansen and Wall, it may be practicable for regulators (...)
    Direct download (7 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  7.  16
    Evidence of Efficacy and Human Right to Health.Sarah J. L. Edwards, Sapfo Lignou & Elizabeth Oduwo - 2012 - American Journal of Bioethics 12 (6):35-37.
    The American Journal of Bioethics, Volume 12, Issue 6, Page 35-37, June 2012.
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  8.  11
    The Animal Efficacy Rule and Public Health.Sarah J. L. Edwards - 2015 - Research Ethics 11 (2):64-66.
  9.  4
    Protecting Privacy Interests in Brain Images : The Limits of Consent.Sarah J. L. Edwards - 2012 - In Sarah Richmond, Geraint Rees & Sarah J. L. Edwards (eds.), I Know What You're Thinking: Brain Imaging and Mental Privacy. Oxford University Press.
  10.  4
    Response to Open Peer Commentaries on “A Radical Approach to Ebola: Saving Humans and Other Animals”.Carolyn P. Neuhaus, Brendan Clarke, Phyllis Illari, Charles H. Norell & Sarah J. L. Edwards - 2019 - American Journal of Bioethics 19 (1):W8-W9.
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  11.  11
    Response to Open Peer Commentaries on “Assessing the Remedy: The Case for Contracts in Clinical Trials”.Sarah J. L. Edwards - 2011 - American Journal of Bioethics 11 (4):W1-W3.
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  12.  18
    Experimental Treatments for Ebola.Sarah J. L. Edwards - 2014 - Research Ethics 10 (3):126-128.
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  13.  5
    Editor's Choice.Sarah J. L. Edwards - 2011 - Research Ethics 7 (2):37-38.
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  14.  3
    Editorial: The Precautionary Paradox and Zika.Sarah J. L. Edwards - 2016 - Research Ethics 12 (4):178-181.
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  15.  4
    Risk Adapted Regulation of Clinical Trials.Sarah J. L. Edwards - 2014 - Research Ethics 10 (1):2-5.
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  16.  3
    Conceptions and Misconceptions of Therapeutic Benefit.Sarah J. L. Edwards - 2016 - Research Ethics 12 (2):64-67.
  17.  1
    Are We Educating Our Research Ethics Committees?Sarah J. L. Edwards - 2017 - Research Ethics 13 (3-4):99-101.
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  18.  1
    Clinical Evidence in the Regulation of Medical Devices.Sarah J. L. Edwards - 2016 - Research Ethics 12 (3):120-122.
  19. Conclusion.Sarah J. L. Edwards & Geraint Rees - 2012 - In Sarah Richmond, Geraint Rees & Sarah J. L. Edwards (eds.), I Know What You're Thinking: Brain Imaging and Mental Privacy. Oxford University Press.
  20. Editorial: Continuous Consent to, or Discreet Control Over, Sharing Digital Data?Sarah J. L. Edwards - 2014 - Research Ethics 10 (4):184-186.
  21.  28
    I Know What You're Thinking: Brain Imaging and Mental Privacy.Sarah Richmond, Geraint Rees & Sarah J. L. Edwards (eds.) - 2012 - Oxford University Press.
    'I know what you're thinking' is a fascinating exploration into the neuroscientific evidence on 'mind reading'.
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark