• 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

不能自主同意的人类进行研究的保护措施是否应适用于非人类灵长类动物的研究?

Should protections for research with humans who cannot consent apply to research with nonhuman primates?

机构信息

Department of Bioethics, NIH Clinical Center, Building 10, Room 1C118, Bethesda, MD, 20892-1156, USA,

出版信息

Theor Med Bioeth. 2014 Apr;35(2):157-73. doi: 10.1007/s11017-014-9285-5.

DOI:10.1007/s11017-014-9285-5
PMID:24647873
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC5524520/
Abstract

Research studies and interventions sometimes offer potential benefits to subjects that compensate for the risks they face. Other studies and interventions, which I refer to as "nonbeneficial" research, do not offer subjects a compensating potential for benefit. These studies and interventions have the potential to exploit subjects for the benefit of others, a concern that is especially acute when investigators enroll individuals who are unable to give informed consent. US regulations for research with human subjects attempt to address this concern by mandating strict protections for nonbeneficial research with subjects who cannot consent. Typically, humans who cannot consent, such as children, may be enrolled in nonbeneficial research only when it poses low risks and has the potential to gather information of sufficient value to justify the risks, an appropriate surrogate gives permission on the individual's behalf and the individual agrees (assents). In contrast, US regulations for nonbeneficial research with nonhuman primates do not include these protections, even though it too involves subjects who cannot consent and who face risks for the benefit of others. Is this difference in regulatory protections justified? Or does the principle of fairness-treat like cases alike-imply that regulations for nonbeneficial research with nonhuman primates should include protections similar to those that apply to nonbeneficial research with humans who cannot consent?

摘要

研究和干预措施有时会为受试者提供潜在的利益补偿他们所面临的风险。而我称之为“非有益”的研究,则不会为受试者提供潜在的利益补偿。这些研究和干预措施有可能利用受试者为他人谋取利益,当研究人员招募那些无法表示知情同意的个体时,这种担忧尤为突出。美国人类受试者研究法规试图通过为无法表示同意的受试者进行非有益研究提供严格保护来解决这一问题。通常情况下,无法表示同意的人类,如儿童,只有在研究风险较低且有可能收集到具有足够价值的信息以证明风险合理时,才能参与非有益研究,即合适的替代同意者代表个人表示同意。相比之下,美国对非人类灵长类动物进行非有益研究的法规并不包括这些保护措施,尽管这些动物也涉及无法表示同意且面临为他人谋取利益的风险的受试者。这种监管保护措施的差异是否合理?或者公平原则——对类似情况一视同仁——是否意味着对非人类灵长类动物进行非有益研究的法规应包括与适用于无法表示同意的人类进行非有益研究的法规类似的保护措施?

相似文献

1
Should protections for research with humans who cannot consent apply to research with nonhuman primates?不能自主同意的人类进行研究的保护措施是否应适用于非人类灵长类动物的研究?
Theor Med Bioeth. 2014 Apr;35(2):157-73. doi: 10.1007/s11017-014-9285-5.
2
Human and animal subjects of research: the moral significance of respect versus welfare.人类和动物研究对象:尊重与福利的道德意义
Theor Med Bioeth. 2006;27(4):305-31. doi: 10.1007/s11017-006-9008-7.
3
Does peer benefit justify research on incompetent individuals? The same-population condition in codes of research ethics.同行受益能否成为对无行为能力个体进行研究的正当理由?研究伦理准则中的同群体条件。
Med Health Care Philos. 2012 Aug;15(3):287-94. doi: 10.1007/s11019-011-9324-1.
4
Confronting ethical permissibility in animal research: rejecting a common assumption and extending a principle of justice.直面动物研究中的伦理可允许性:摒弃常见假设,拓展公正原则。
Theor Med Bioeth. 2014 Apr;35(2):175-85. doi: 10.1007/s11017-014-9290-8.
5
Harms and deprivation of benefits for nonhuman primates in research.研究中非人类灵长类动物的伤害和利益剥夺。
Theor Med Bioeth. 2014 Apr;35(2):143-56. doi: 10.1007/s11017-014-9288-2.
6
Vulnerable populations in research: the case of the seriously ill.研究中的弱势群体:重症患者的案例
Theor Med Bioeth. 2006;27(3):245-64. doi: 10.1007/s11017-006-9000-2.
7
Free-riding and research ethics.搭便车与研究伦理。
Am J Bioeth. 2005 Winter;5(1):50-1; author reply W15-8. doi: 10.1080/15265160590927688.
8
Vulnerability: a needed moral safeguard.脆弱性:一项必要的道德保障。
Am J Bioeth. 2004 Summer;4(3):82-4; discussion W32. doi: 10.1080/15265160490907366.
9
Nonbeneficial research with individuals who cannot consent: is it ethically better to enroll healthy or affected individuals?针对无法表示同意的个体进行的非有益研究:招募健康个体还是患病个体在伦理上更可取?
IRB. 2003 Jul-Aug;25(4):1-4.
10
Rethinking research ethics.重新思考研究伦理。
Am J Bioeth. 2005 Winter;5(1):7-28. doi: 10.1080/15265160590900678.

引用本文的文献

1
The interplay between nonalcoholic fatty liver disease and atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease.非酒精性脂肪性肝病与动脉粥样硬化性心血管疾病之间的相互作用。
Front Cardiovasc Med. 2023 May 2;10:1116861. doi: 10.3389/fcvm.2023.1116861. eCollection 2023.
2
Suffering in Animal Research: The Need for Limits and the Possibility of Compensation.动物研究中的痛苦:限制的必要性和补偿的可能性。
Kennedy Inst Ethics J. 2022;32(3):297-311. doi: 10.1353/ken.2022.0019.
3
Invasive Research on Non-Human Primates-Time to Turn the Page.对非人类灵长类动物的侵入性研究——是时候翻开新篇章了。
Animals (Basel). 2021 Oct 19;11(10):2999. doi: 10.3390/ani11102999.
4
The Emergence and Development of Animal Research Ethics: A Review with a Focus on Nonhuman Primates.动物研究伦理的出现与发展:以非人类灵长类动物为重点的综述。
Sci Eng Ethics. 2020 Aug;26(4):2277-2293. doi: 10.1007/s11948-020-00219-z. Epub 2020 Apr 29.
5
One Health, Vaccines and Ebola: The Opportunities for Shared Benefits.同一健康、疫苗与埃博拉:实现共同利益的机遇
J Agric Environ Ethics. 2015;28(6):1011-1032. doi: 10.1007/s10806-015-9574-7. Epub 2015 Sep 16.
6
Ethical and Scientific Pitfalls Concerning Laboratory Research with Non-Human Primates, and Possible Solutions.关于非人灵长类动物实验室研究的伦理和科学陷阱及可能的解决方案
Animals (Basel). 2018 Dec 29;9(1):12. doi: 10.3390/ani9010012.
7
Rethinking the ethics of research involving nonhuman animals: introduction.重新思考涉及非人类动物的研究伦理:引言
Theor Med Bioeth. 2014 Apr;35(2):91-6. doi: 10.1007/s11017-014-9291-7.
8
Moving beyond the welfare standard of psychological well-being for nonhuman primates: the case of chimpanzees.超越非人类灵长类动物的心理幸福感福利标准:以黑猩猩为例。
Theor Med Bioeth. 2014 Apr;35(2):105-16. doi: 10.1007/s11017-014-9289-1.

本文引用的文献

1
World Medical Association Declaration of Helsinki: ethical principles for medical research involving human subjects.《世界医学协会赫尔辛基宣言:涉及人类受试者的医学研究伦理原则》
JAMA. 2013 Nov 27;310(20):2191-4. doi: 10.1001/jama.2013.281053.
2
What we worry about when we worry about the ethics of clinical research.当我们担忧临床研究的伦理学问题时,我们所担心的是什么。
Theor Med Bioeth. 2011 Jun;32(3):161-80. doi: 10.1007/s11017-011-9176-y.
3
Human and animal subjects of research: the moral significance of respect versus welfare.人类和动物研究对象:尊重与福利的道德意义
Theor Med Bioeth. 2006;27(4):305-31. doi: 10.1007/s11017-006-9008-7.
4
Protecting subjects who cannot give consent: toward a better standard for "minimal" risks.保护无法给予知情同意的受试者:迈向“最小”风险的更好标准。
Hastings Cent Rep. 2005 Sep-Oct;35(5):37-43.
5
The ethics of research on great apes.对大猩猩的研究伦理。
Nature. 2005 Sep 1;437(7055):27-9. doi: 10.1038/437027a.
6
Nonbeneficial research with individuals who cannot consent: is it ethically better to enroll healthy or affected individuals?针对无法表示同意的个体进行的非有益研究:招募健康个体还是患病个体在伦理上更可取?
IRB. 2003 Jul-Aug;25(4):1-4.