• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

治疗性误解:问题与解决方案

The therapeutic misconception: problems and solutions.

作者信息

Lidz Charles W, Appelbaum Paul S

机构信息

Department of Psychiatry, University of Massachusetts Medical School, Worcester, Massachusetts, USA.

出版信息

Med Care. 2002 Sep;40(9 Suppl):V55-63. doi: 10.1097/01.MLR.0000023956.25813.18.

DOI:10.1097/01.MLR.0000023956.25813.18
PMID:12226586
Abstract

BACKGROUND

The therapeutic misconception occurs when a research subject fails to appreciate the distinction between the imperatives of clinical research and of ordinary treatment, and therefore inaccurately attributes therapeutic intent to research procedures. The therapeutic misconception is a serious problem for informed consent in clinical research.

OBJECTIVES

This paper analyzes the nature and origins of the therapeutic misconception and suggests some ways in which researchers can overcome this problem when obtaining a subject's consent to participation in research.

RESEARCH DESIGN

A conceptual analysis of informed consent to research and a review of the empirical literature are undertaken.

RESULTS

Research and clinical care involve different standards for how the patient/subject is to be treated. The confusion of the two often leads to profound misunderstandings on the part of the patient/subject.

DISCUSSION

A method for describing to patients/subjects the differences between research and treatment is proposed as a potential solution to the therapeutic misconception. Research is needed to determine whether this or any other change in the nature of the disclosure is effective in reducing the therapeutic misconception.

摘要

背景

当研究对象未能认识到临床研究的要求与普通治疗的要求之间的区别,从而错误地将治疗意图归因于研究程序时,就会出现治疗性误解。治疗性误解是临床研究中知情同意的一个严重问题。

目的

本文分析了治疗性误解的性质和根源,并提出了一些研究人员在获得受试者参与研究的同意时可以克服这一问题的方法。

研究设计

对研究的知情同意进行概念分析,并对实证文献进行综述。

结果

研究和临床护理涉及对患者/受试者治疗方式的不同标准。两者的混淆常常导致患者/受试者产生深刻的误解。

讨论

提出了一种向患者/受试者描述研究与治疗之间差异的方法,作为解决治疗性误解的一种潜在方案。需要进行研究以确定这种披露性质的改变或任何其他改变是否能有效减少治疗性误解。

相似文献

1
The therapeutic misconception: problems and solutions.治疗性误解:问题与解决方案
Med Care. 2002 Sep;40(9 Suppl):V55-63. doi: 10.1097/01.MLR.0000023956.25813.18.
2
Beyond informed consent: the therapeutic misconception and trust.超越知情同意:治疗性误解与信任。
J Med Ethics. 2008 Mar;34(3):202-5. doi: 10.1136/jme.2006.019406.
3
Clinical trials and medical care: defining the therapeutic misconception.临床试验与医疗护理:界定治疗性误解
PLoS Med. 2007 Nov 27;4(11):e324. doi: 10.1371/journal.pmed.0040324.
4
Unconscious emotional reasoning and the therapeutic misconception.无意识情感推理与治疗误区
J Med Ethics. 2008 Mar;34(3):193-7. doi: 10.1136/jme.2006.018960.
5
Toward an informed discussion of informed consent: a review and critique of the empirical studies.迈向关于知情同意的明智讨论:实证研究的综述与批判
Ariz Law Rev. 1983;25(2):265-346.
6
Voluntariness of consent for research: an empirical and conceptual review.研究同意的自愿性:一项实证与概念性综述。
Med Care. 2002 Sep;40(9 Suppl):V69-80. doi: 10.1097/01.MLR.0000023958.28108.9C.
7
Obtaining voluntary consent for research in desperately ill patients.在重症患者中获取研究的自愿同意书。
Med Care. 2002 Sep;40(9 Suppl):V64-8. doi: 10.1097/01.MLR.0000023957.23565.E9.
8
False hopes and best data: consent to research and the therapeutic misconception.虚假的希望与最佳数据:研究同意与治疗性误解
Hastings Cent Rep. 1987 Apr;17(2):20-4.
9
Improving informed consent: insights from behavioral decision research.
Med Care. 2002 Sep;40(9 Suppl):V30-8. doi: 10.1097/01.MLR.0000023953.55783.4A.
10
[Ethics of medical scientific research: informed consent and the therapeutic misconception].[医学科研伦理:知情同意与治疗性误解]
Ned Tijdschr Geneeskd. 2008 Mar 22;152(12):679-83.

引用本文的文献

1
Revolutionizing Brain Research Using Portable MRI in Field Settings: Public Perspectives on the Ethical and Legal Challenges.利用现场便携式磁共振成像技术革新脑研究:公众对伦理和法律挑战的看法
Neuroethics. 2025;18(2):36. doi: 10.1007/s12152-025-09606-4. Epub 2025 Jul 26.
2
A pilot study on treatment content in virtual reality-assisted aggression therapy at a maximum-security forensic psychiatric clinic.一项在高度戒备的法医精神病诊所进行的虚拟现实辅助攻击疗法治疗内容的试点研究。
Sci Rep. 2025 May 16;15(1):16983. doi: 10.1038/s41598-025-01194-w.
3
A Qualitative Study on Ethics Education at Pharmacy Colleges in Japan Based on a Survey of Ethics Educators.
基于对伦理教育工作者的调查对日本药学院校伦理教育的定性研究
Pharmacy (Basel). 2025 Mar 18;13(2):45. doi: 10.3390/pharmacy13020045.
4
Researcher views on returning results from multi-omics data to research participants: insights from The Molecular Transducers of Physical Activity Consortium (MoTrPAC) Study.研究人员对将多组学数据结果反馈给研究参与者的看法:来自身体活动分子传感器联盟(MoTrPAC)研究的见解
BMC Med Ethics. 2025 Feb 7;26(1):22. doi: 10.1186/s12910-025-01174-9.
5
Considerations for legal, ethical, and effective practice in dementia research.痴呆症研究中合法、合乎伦理及有效实践的考量因素。
Brain Commun. 2024 Jun 14;6(4):fcae211. doi: 10.1093/braincomms/fcae211. eCollection 2024.
6
Patient, Relative and Staff Experiences of Clinical Trial Participation in Neurooncology: "Maybe You Can Also Show the Positive, No Matter How It Ends".神经肿瘤学临床试验中患者、家属及工作人员的参与体验:“无论结局如何,或许你也能展现积极的一面”
Cancer Manag Res. 2024 Jun 21;16:663-676. doi: 10.2147/CMAR.S447407. eCollection 2024.
7
VR-assisted aggression treatment in forensic psychiatry: a qualitative study in patients with severe mental disorders.法医精神病学中虚拟现实辅助攻击行为治疗:对重度精神障碍患者的定性研究
Front Psychiatry. 2024 May 16;15:1307633. doi: 10.3389/fpsyt.2024.1307633. eCollection 2024.
8
New Window Into Hepatitis B in Africa: Liver Sampling Combined With Single-Cell Omics Enables Deep and Longitudinal Assessment of Intrahepatic Immunity in Zambia.深入了解非洲乙型肝炎:肝脏采样与单细胞组学相结合,可深度且纵向评估赞比亚的肝内免疫。
J Infect Dis. 2024 Nov 15;230(5):e1171-e1175. doi: 10.1093/infdis/jiae054.
9
Your robot therapist is not your therapist: understanding the role of AI-powered mental health chatbots.你的机器人治疗师并非你的治疗师:理解人工智能驱动的心理健康聊天机器人的作用。
Front Digit Health. 2023 Nov 8;5:1278186. doi: 10.3389/fdgth.2023.1278186. eCollection 2023.
10
Perceptions about and reasons for participation in research bronchoscopy in Uganda: A qualitative analysis.乌干达研究性支气管镜检查的认知和参与原因:定性分析。
PLoS One. 2023 Oct 20;18(10):e0293174. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0293174. eCollection 2023.