• 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

开放标签扩展研究的同意:一些伦理问题。

Consent to open label extension studies: some ethical issues.

作者信息

Wainwright P

出版信息

J Med Ethics. 2002 Dec;28(6):373-6. doi: 10.1136/jme.28.6.373.

DOI:10.1136/jme.28.6.373
PMID:12468657
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC1757098/
Abstract

A frequent feature of pharmaceutical research is the open label extension study, in which patients participating in double blind placebo controlled trials of new medications are invited, on completion of the initial trial, to take the study drug for some further period. Patients are openly given the active substance at this stage, regardless of their assignment in the initial trial. Investigators are typically reluctant to unblind the patients' assignment at the point of entry into the open label phase, on the grounds that this may introduce ascertainment bias in the main study. It is argued that patients invited to participate in open label extension studies cannot give a proper consent to such research unless they know to which arm of the main trial they were recruited. It is further argued that to recruit certain groups of patients from placebo controlled trials into open label extension studies may also be unethical for clinical reasons.

摘要

药物研究的一个常见特点是开放标签扩展研究,即参与新药物双盲安慰剂对照试验的患者在初始试验完成后,被邀请在更长一段时间内服用研究药物。在此阶段,无论患者在初始试验中的分组如何,都会向他们公开给予活性物质。研究人员通常不愿意在进入开放标签阶段时揭开患者分组的盲底,理由是这可能会在主要研究中引入偏倚。有人认为,被邀请参加开放标签扩展研究的患者,除非他们知道自己是被招募到主要试验的哪一组,否则无法对这类研究给予适当的知情同意。还有人认为,出于临床原因,从安慰剂对照试验中招募某些患者群体进入开放标签扩展研究也可能不符合伦理道德。

相似文献

1
Consent to open label extension studies: some ethical issues.开放标签扩展研究的同意:一些伦理问题。
J Med Ethics. 2002 Dec;28(6):373-6. doi: 10.1136/jme.28.6.373.
2
Clinical research before informed consent.知情同意前的临床研究。
Kennedy Inst Ethics J. 2014 Jun;24(2):141-57. doi: 10.1353/ken.2014.0009.
3
Reasons for participation in pain research: can they indicate a lack of informed consent?参与疼痛研究的原因:它们能否表明缺乏知情同意?
Pain Med. 2009 Jan;10(1):111-9. doi: 10.1111/j.1526-4637.2008.00481.x. Epub 2008 Jul 24.
4
Ethical considerations concerning treatment allocation in drug development trials.药物研发试验中治疗分配的伦理考量
Stat Methods Med Res. 2002 Oct;11(5):403-11. doi: 10.1191/0962280202sm299ra.
5
Sham surgery: an ethical analysis.假手术:伦理分析。
Sci Eng Ethics. 2004 Jan;10(1):157-66. doi: 10.1007/s11948-004-0073-x.
6
Post-recruitment confirmation of informed consent by SMS.短信确认招募后的知情同意。
J Med Ethics. 2010 Feb;36(2):126-8. doi: 10.1136/jme.2009.033456.
7
American Society of Clinical Oncology policy statement: oversight of clinical research.美国临床肿瘤学会政策声明:临床研究监督
J Clin Oncol. 2003 Jun 15;21(12):2377-86. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2003.04.026. Epub 2003 Apr 29.
8
Informed consent and the use of placebo in Poland: ethical and legal aspects.波兰的知情同意与安慰剂使用:伦理与法律层面
Sci Eng Ethics. 2004 Jan;10(1):167-78. doi: 10.1007/s11948-004-0074-9.
9
Appreciation of the informed consent procedure in a randomised trial of decompressive surgery for space occupying hemispheric infarction.在一项针对占位性半球梗死减压手术的随机试验中对知情同意程序的理解
J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry. 2007 Oct;78(10):1124-8. doi: 10.1136/jnnp.2006.110726. Epub 2007 Mar 30.
10
Individual autonomy and the double-blind controlled experiment: the case of desperate volunteers.
J Med Philos. 1995 Feb;20(1):43-55. doi: 10.1093/jmp/20.1.43.

引用本文的文献

1
Duration of Pediatric Clinical Trials Submitted to the US Food and Drug Administration.向美国食品和药物管理局提交的儿科临床试验持续时间。
JAMA Pediatr. 2019 Jan 1;173(1):60-67. doi: 10.1001/jamapediatrics.2018.3227.
2
Don't ask, don't tell? Revealing placebo responses to research participants and patients.不问不说?向研究参与者和患者揭示安慰剂反应。
Pain. 2008 Apr;135(3):213-214. doi: 10.1016/j.pain.2008.01.009. Epub 2008 Feb 20.
3
Open label extension studies: research or marketing?开放标签扩展研究:是研究还是营销?
BMJ. 2005 Sep 10;331(7516):572-4. doi: 10.1136/bmj.331.7516.572.
4
Can keeping clinical trial participants blind to their study treatment adversely affect subsequent care?让临床试验参与者对其研究治疗不知情会对后续护理产生不利影响吗?
Contemp Clin Trials. 2005 Jun;26(3):290-9. doi: 10.1016/j.cct.2005.01.003. Epub 2005 Mar 3.

本文引用的文献

1
Placebo-controlled trials and the Declaration of Helsinki.安慰剂对照试验与《赫尔辛基宣言》。
Lancet. 2002 Apr 13;359(9314):1337-40. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(02)08277-6.
2
Placebo in clinical trials for depression: complexity and necessity.抑郁症临床试验中的安慰剂:复杂性与必要性
JAMA. 2002 Apr 10;287(14):1853-4. doi: 10.1001/jama.287.14.1853.
3
Placebo response in studies of major depression: variable, substantial, and growing.重度抑郁症研究中的安慰剂反应:多变、显著且呈上升趋势。
JAMA. 2002 Apr 10;287(14):1840-7. doi: 10.1001/jama.287.14.1840.
4
Is the placebo powerless? An analysis of clinical trials comparing placebo with no treatment.安慰剂无效吗?一项比较安慰剂与不治疗的临床试验分析。
N Engl J Med. 2001 May 24;344(21):1594-602. doi: 10.1056/NEJM200105243442106.
5
The troublesome concept of the person.令人困扰的人的概念。
Theor Med Bioeth. 1999 Aug;20(4):347-59. doi: 10.1023/a:1009990632439.
6
The ethical problems with sham surgery in clinical research.临床研究中假手术的伦理问题。
N Engl J Med. 1999 Sep 23;341(13):992-6. doi: 10.1056/NEJM199909233411312.