Hastings Cent Rep. 2017 Mar;47(2):30-31. doi: 10.1002/hast.687.
In this issue of the Hastings Center Report, Paul Christopher and colleagues describe a study of why prisoners choose to enroll in clinical research. The article represents an important methodological and policy contribution to the literature on prisoner participation in research and medical experimentation. Given the methodological and ethical debates to which this research seeks to make an empirical contribution, the careful manner in which the study was conducted and the transparency with which the authors describe the research is especially noteworthy. In sum, I respect the research steps the authors took. However, I disagree with their conclusions about both the absence of coercion for prisoner clinical research participants and the merits of applying risk-benefit models to govern prisoner research participation.
在本期《 Hastings 中心报告》中,Paul Christopher 及其同事描述了一项研究,旨在探讨囚犯选择参与临床研究的原因。这篇文章是对囚犯参与研究和医学实验文献的重要方法学和政策贡献。鉴于这项研究旨在为方法论和伦理辩论做出实证贡献,研究的开展方式和作者对研究的描述透明度都非常值得注意。总之,我尊重作者所采取的研究步骤。然而,我不同意他们关于囚犯临床研究参与者不存在胁迫以及应用风险效益模型来管理囚犯研究参与的结论。