Suppr超能文献

在社区环境中,规划辅助护理的责任给营养研究带来了伦理挑战。

Responsibilities to plan for ancillary care pose ethical challenges for nutrition research in the community setting.

机构信息

Johns Hopkins Berman Institute of Bioethics and Department of International Health, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, MD, USA.

出版信息

J Nutr. 2012 Oct;142(10):1787-90. doi: 10.3945/jn.111.155382. Epub 2012 Aug 29.

Abstract

Investigators who conduct nutrition research in the community setting, particularly among underserved populations, face the ethical question of whether and how to respond to participants' unmet health needs. The research ethics literature conceptualizes this question as one of ancillary care (AC): what is the nature and extent of researchers' ethical responsibilities, if any, to provide or facilitate health care that research participants need but that is not necessary to ensure the safety or scientific validity of the research? In this paper, we highlight 3 ethical challenges involved in the planning of AC responses for nutrition research conducted in the community setting: influence of provision of AC on primary study outcomes as an issue of trial design; whether to extend the provision of AC beyond research participants to nonparticipants with the same health needs; and how best to train field workers who may be the most likely members of the study team to encounter the health needs anticipated among participants. Although the global ethical discussion of AC is gaining in depth, breadth, and practical influence, it remains relatively uninformed by perspectives specific to nutrition research. Our objective is to encourage nutrition researchers to engage proactively in the emerging ethical discussion of AC, so that their relevant experiences and concerns can be taken into account in the eventual formation of ethical guidelines and policies.

摘要

在社区环境中进行营养研究的调查人员,特别是在服务不足的人群中,面临着一个伦理问题,即是否以及如何回应参与者未满足的健康需求。研究伦理文献将这个问题概念化为辅助医疗(AC)的问题:研究人员如果有任何道德责任,提供或促进研究参与者所需但对确保研究的安全性或科学有效性并非必要的医疗保健,其性质和范围是什么?在本文中,我们强调了社区环境中进行营养研究的 AC 响应计划中涉及的 3 个伦理挑战:提供 AC 对主要研究结果的影响作为试验设计问题;是否将 AC 的提供范围扩大到具有相同健康需求的非参与者;以及如何最好地培训可能是最有可能遇到参与者预期的健康需求的研究团队成员的现场工作人员。尽管全球对 AC 的伦理讨论在深度、广度和实际影响方面都在不断增加,但它仍然相对缺乏针对营养研究的观点。我们的目标是鼓励营养研究人员积极参与 AC 的新兴伦理讨论,以便在最终制定伦理准则和政策时考虑到他们的相关经验和关切。

相似文献

5
Participatory action research: considerations for ethical review.参与式行动研究:伦理审查的考量
Soc Sci Med. 2005 May;60(10):2333-40. doi: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2004.10.004. Epub 2004 Dec 19.

本文引用的文献

4
A field training guide for human subjects research ethics.人体研究伦理现场培训指南。
PLoS Med. 2010 Oct 5;7(10):e1000349. doi: 10.1371/journal.pmed.1000349.
5
Ancillary care in community-based public health intervention research.社区公共卫生干预研究中的辅助性医疗。
Am J Public Health. 2010 Feb;100(2):211-6. doi: 10.2105/AJPH.2009.168393. Epub 2009 Dec 17.

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验