• 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

研究的潜在益处可能证明某些研究风险是合理的。

The Potential Benefits of Research May Justify Certain Research Risks.

机构信息

Department of Bioethics, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland.

Child Health Innovation Leadership Department, Johnson & Johnson, Raritan, New Jersey; and.

出版信息

Pediatrics. 2019 Mar;143(3). doi: 10.1542/peds.2018-1703. Epub 2019 Feb 20.

DOI:10.1542/peds.2018-1703
PMID:30787097
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10081016/
Abstract

US regulations allow institutional review boards to approve pediatric clinical trials only when the risks are minimal or (in some cases) a minor increase over minimal, or when the risks are justified by a potential for direct benefit to the participants. But how should an institutional review board determine if the risks of pediatric clinical trials are justified by a potential for participant benefit? In this Ethics Rounds article, we consider which potential benefits can justify which research risks with a focus on randomized clinical trials.

摘要

美国法规仅允许机构审查委员会在风险最小化或(在某些情况下)仅略高于最小化时批准儿科临床试验,或者当风险因参与者潜在直接获益而合理时。但是,机构审查委员会应如何确定儿科临床试验的风险是否因参与者潜在获益而合理?在本期伦理圆桌会议中,我们考虑了哪些潜在获益可以证明哪些研究风险是合理的,重点是随机临床试验。

相似文献

1
The Potential Benefits of Research May Justify Certain Research Risks.研究的潜在益处可能证明某些研究风险是合理的。
Pediatrics. 2019 Mar;143(3). doi: 10.1542/peds.2018-1703. Epub 2019 Feb 20.
2
How do institutional review boards apply the federal risk and benefit standards for pediatric research?机构审查委员会如何应用联邦关于儿科研究的风险和收益标准?
JAMA. 2004 Jan 28;291(4):476-82. doi: 10.1001/jama.291.4.476.
3
Considerations in the evaluation and determination of minimal risk in pragmatic clinical trials.实用临床试验中最小风险评估与确定的考量因素。
Clin Trials. 2015 Oct;12(5):485-93. doi: 10.1177/1740774515597687. Epub 2015 Sep 15.
4
Addressing risks to advance mental health research.解决推进心理健康研究的风险。
JAMA Psychiatry. 2013 Dec;70(12):1363-71. doi: 10.1001/jamapsychiatry.2013.2105.
5
Quantifying the federal minimal risk standard: implications for pediatric research without a prospect of direct benefit.量化联邦最低风险标准:对无直接受益前景的儿科研究的影响。
JAMA. 2005 Aug 17;294(7):826-32. doi: 10.1001/jama.294.7.826.
6
[Randomized clinical trials: variants, randomization methods, analysis, ethical issues and regulations].[随机临床试验:变体、随机化方法、分析、伦理问题与法规]
Salud Publica Mex. 2004 Nov-Dec;46(6):559-84. doi: 10.1590/s0036-36342004000600012.
7
Streamlining the institutional review board process in pragmatic randomized clinical trials: challenges and lessons learned from the Aspirin Dosing: A Patient-centric Trial Assessing Benefits and Long-Term Effectiveness (ADAPTABLE) trial.简化实用随机临床试验的机构审查委员会流程:来自阿司匹林剂量:评估获益和长期效果的以患者为中心的试验(ADAPTABLE)试验的挑战和经验教训。
Trials. 2021 Jan 25;22(1):90. doi: 10.1186/s13063-021-05026-w.
8
Practical tips for working effectively with your institutional review board.与机构审查委员会有效合作的实用技巧。
Respir Care. 2008 Oct;53(10):1354-61.
9
Uncertainty about effects is a key factor influencing institutional review boards' approval of clinical studies.效应的不确定性是影响机构审查委员会批准临床研究的关键因素。
Ann Epidemiol. 2014 Oct;24(10):734-40. doi: 10.1016/j.annepidem.2014.06.100. Epub 2014 Jul 10.
10
Randomized n-of-1 Trials: Quality Improvement, Research, or Both?随机单病例试验:质量改进、研究,还是两者兼具?
Pediatrics. 2016 Aug;138(2). doi: 10.1542/peds.2016-1103. Epub 2016 Jul 6.

引用本文的文献

1
Prenatally-diagnosed renal failure: an ethical framework for decision-making.产前诊断的肾衰竭:决策的伦理框架
J Perinatol. 2024 Mar;44(3):333-338. doi: 10.1038/s41372-023-01779-1. Epub 2023 Sep 21.
2
Minimizing Risks Is Not Enough: The Relevance of Benefits to Protecting Research Participants.将风险最小化还不够:保护研究参与者的利益的相关性。
Perspect Biol Med. 2020;63(2):346-358. doi: 10.1353/pbm.2020.0023.

本文引用的文献

1
Adjuvant steroid treatment following Kasai portoenterostomy and clinical outcomes of biliary atresia patients: an updated meta-analysis.Kasai 门腔分流术后辅助类固醇治疗与胆道闭锁患者的临床结局:一项更新的荟萃分析。
World J Pediatr. 2017 Feb;13(1):20-26. doi: 10.1007/s12519-016-0052-8. Epub 2016 Oct 15.
2
Ethical Considerations in Conducting Pediatric and Neonatal Research in Clinical Pharmacology.临床药理学中开展儿科和新生儿研究的伦理考量
Curr Pharm Des. 2015;21(39):5619-35. doi: 10.2174/1381612821666150901105146.
3
Placebo-controlled trials in pediatrics and the child's best interest.儿科中的安慰剂对照试验与儿童的最大利益。
Ital J Pediatr. 2015 Feb 15;41:11. doi: 10.1186/s13052-015-0118-6.
4
The ethical principle of scientific necessity in pediatric research.儿科研究中科学必要性的伦理原则。
Am J Bioeth. 2014;14(12):14-5. doi: 10.1080/15265161.2014.964874.
5
Parental permission and child assent in research on children.在儿童研究中获得父母同意和儿童同意。
Yale J Biol Med. 2013 Sep 20;86(3):291-301. eCollection 2013 Sep.
6
Additional safeguards for children in clinical investigations of food and drug administration-regulated products. Final rule.食品药品监督管理局监管产品临床研究中儿童的额外保障措施。最终规则。
Fed Regist. 2013 Feb 26;78(38):12937-51.
7
Which benefits of research participation count as 'direct'?研究参与的哪些益处算作“直接”?
Bioethics. 2012 Feb;26(2):60-7. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-8519.2010.01825.x. Epub 2010 May 17.
8
It is time to professionalize institutional review boards.现在是时候让机构审查委员会专业化了。
Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med. 2009 Dec;163(12):1163-4. doi: 10.1001/archpediatrics.2009.225.
9
National Bioethics Advisory Commission Report: Ethical and policy issues in international research.国家生物伦理咨询委员会报告:国际研究中的伦理与政策问题
IRB. 2001 Jul-Aug;23(4):9-12.
10
The need to revise the Declaration of Helsinki.修订《赫尔辛基宣言》的必要性。
N Engl J Med. 1999 Aug 12;341(7):531-4. doi: 10.1056/NEJM199908123410713.