• 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

临床研究中的临床医生把关在伦理上站不住脚:分析。

Clinician gate-keeping in clinical research is not ethically defensible: an analysis.

机构信息

Department of Nursing and Supportive Care Research, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, East Melbourne, Australia.

出版信息

J Med Ethics. 2010 Jun;36(6):363-6. doi: 10.1136/jme.2009.031716. Epub 2010 May 3.

DOI:10.1136/jme.2009.031716
PMID:20439334
Abstract

Clinician gate-keeping is the process whereby healthcare providers prevent access to eligible patients for research recruitment. This paper contends that clinician gate-keeping violates three principles that underpin international ethical guidelines: respect for persons or autonomy; beneficence or a favourable balance of risks and potential benefits; and justice or a fair distribution of the benefits and burdens of research. In order to stimulate further research and debate, three possible strategies are also presented to eliminate gate-keeping: partnership with professional researchers; collaborative research design and clinician education.

摘要

临床医生把关是指医疗保健提供者阻止符合条件的患者参与研究招募的过程。本文认为,临床医生把关违反了国际伦理准则所依据的三项原则:尊重人或自主权;善行或风险与潜在利益的有利平衡;以及公正或研究的利益和负担的公平分配。为了激发进一步的研究和辩论,还提出了三种消除把关的可能策略:与专业研究人员建立伙伴关系;协作研究设计和临床医生教育。

相似文献

1
Clinician gate-keeping in clinical research is not ethically defensible: an analysis.临床研究中的临床医生把关在伦理上站不住脚:分析。
J Med Ethics. 2010 Jun;36(6):363-6. doi: 10.1136/jme.2009.031716. Epub 2010 May 3.
2
Clinical research law in Jordan: an ethical analysis.约旦的临床研究法:伦理分析
Dev World Bioeth. 2009 Apr;9(1):26-33. doi: 10.1111/j.1471-8847.2007.00221.x. Epub 2007 Dec 12.
3
Bioethics for clinicians: 10. Research ethics.临床医生的生物伦理学:10. 研究伦理学。
CMAJ. 1997 Apr 15;156(8):1153-7.
4
Research ethics.研究伦理。
West Indian Med J. 1995 Dec;44(4):115-8.
5
Assuring ethical treatment of students as research participants.确保以符合伦理道德的方式对待作为研究参与者的学生。
J Nurs Educ. 2009 Oct;48(10):537-41. doi: 10.3928/01484834-20090610-08. Epub 2009 Oct 9.
6
Ethics of research in perinatal medicine.围产医学研究的伦理问题。
Semin Perinatol. 2009 Dec;33(6):391-6. doi: 10.1053/j.semperi.2009.07.007.
7
Research recruitment via camouflaged sampling: addressing the legal and ethical aspects of privacy concerns.通过伪装抽样进行研究招募:解决隐私问题的法律和伦理方面
Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf. 2008 Aug;17(8):798-800. doi: 10.1002/pds.1628.
8
Ethical principles in health research and review process.健康研究中的伦理原则与审查过程。
Acta Trop. 2009 Nov;112 Suppl 1:S2-7. doi: 10.1016/j.actatropica.2009.07.031. Epub 2009 Aug 7.
9
[Ethical aspects of transcultural research].[跨文化研究的伦理问题]
Ugeskr Laeger. 2006 Jan 30;168(5):466-8.
10
Benefit--a neglected aspect of health research ethics.益处——健康研究伦理中一个被忽视的方面。
Dan Med Bull. 2008 Nov;55(4):216-8.

引用本文的文献

1
Implementing constraint-induced movement therapy into practice in sub-acute stroke: Experiences and perceptions of stroke survivors and therapists.在亚急性中风患者中实施强制性运动疗法的实践:中风幸存者和治疗师的经验与看法。
Br J Occup Ther. 2024 Nov;87(11):693-703. doi: 10.1177/03080226241261183. Epub 2024 Jul 26.
2
Clinical reasoning in pragmatic trial randomization: a qualitative interview study.实用临床试验随机分组中的临床推理:一项定性访谈研究。
Trials. 2023 Jun 27;24(1):431. doi: 10.1186/s13063-023-07445-3.
3
What Happens When you Ask for Feedback? Anticipating and Addressing Challenges Can Be Effective for Eliciting Parents' Views About Their Critically Ill Child's Retrieval to Paediatric Intensive Care.
当你寻求反馈时会发生什么?预测并应对挑战对于引出家长对其危重病童转至儿科重症监护病房的看法可能是有效的。
J Patient Exp. 2023 Jan 23;10:23743735221143949. doi: 10.1177/23743735221143949. eCollection 2023.
4
Experiences and perspectives of patients with advanced cancer regarding work resumption and work retention: a qualitative interview study.晚期癌症患者关于恢复工作和保留工作的经验和观点:一项定性访谈研究。
Support Care Cancer. 2022 Dec;30(12):9713-9721. doi: 10.1007/s00520-022-07436-1. Epub 2022 Nov 25.
5
Understanding the perspectives of recruiters is key to improving randomised controlled trial enrolment: a qualitative evidence synthesis.了解招聘人员的观点是提高随机对照试验入组率的关键:一项定性证据综合研究。
Trials. 2022 Oct 20;23(1):883. doi: 10.1186/s13063-022-06818-4.
6
Development of the FORUM: a new patient and clinician reported outcome measure for forensic mental health services.论坛的开发:一种新的由患者和临床医生报告的法医精神卫生服务结局测量工具。
Psychol Crime Law. 2022 Oct 21;28(9):865-882. doi: 10.1080/1068316X.2021.1962873. Epub 2021 Aug 23.
7
Including migrant oncology patients in research: A multisite pilot randomised controlled trial testing consultation audio-recordings and question prompt lists.将肿瘤移民患者纳入研究:一项多中心试点随机对照试验,测试咨询录音和问题提示清单。
Contemp Clin Trials Commun. 2022 May 28;28:100932. doi: 10.1016/j.conctc.2022.100932. eCollection 2022 Aug.
8
Meeting ethical challenges with authenticity when engaging patients and families in end-of-life and palliative care research: a qualitative study.在终末期和姑息治疗研究中与患者及其家属接触时保持真实性以应对伦理挑战:一项定性研究。
BMC Palliat Care. 2022 May 16;21(1):74. doi: 10.1186/s12904-022-00964-x.
9
Patients' decision to contribute to a biobank in the light of the patient-recruiter relationship-a qualitative study of broad consent in a hospital setting.基于患者与招募者关系的患者参与生物样本库的决策——医院环境下广泛同意的定性研究
J Community Genet. 2021 Jan;12(1):15-25. doi: 10.1007/s12687-020-00479-z. Epub 2020 Aug 10.
10
Recruiters' perspectives of recruiting women during pregnancy and childbirth to clinical trials: A qualitative evidence synthesis.招聘人员在临床试验中招募孕妇和产妇的观点:定性证据综合分析。
PLoS One. 2020 Jun 19;15(6):e0234783. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0234783. eCollection 2020.