Suppr超能文献

[电子病历用于研究:新的伦理挑战与可能的解决方案]

[Use of Electronic Medical Records for Research: New Ethical Challenges and Possible Solutions].

作者信息

Meneses-Oliveira Carlos

机构信息

Comissão de Ética para a Saúde. Hospital Beatriz Ângelo. Loures; Serviço do Medicina Intensiva. Hospital Beatriz Ângelo. Loures. Portugal.

出版信息

Acta Med Port. 2019 May 31;32(5):332-334. doi: 10.20344/amp.11280.

Abstract

Some clinicians feel that Ethics Committees act as a blockade to observational clinical studies. In the case of retrospective studies some have tried to solve this problem by reducing this sensitive data to simple administrative data in the hands of the government. Others see the new European General Data Protection Regulation 2016/679 (European Union) as being more liberal than the Portuguese Law nº 21/2014, April 16th (Clinical Research Law). Both solutions presume participant consent from his / her silence, even if nobody truly tried to specifically inform him / her. Such views do collide with the guarantees of protection of patient's ethical rights. In this article we propose an ethical alternative to those positions.

摘要

一些临床医生认为伦理委员会对观察性临床研究起到了阻碍作用。在回顾性研究的情况下,一些人试图通过将这些敏感数据简化为政府掌握的简单行政数据来解决这个问题。另一些人则认为新的欧洲《通用数据保护条例》2016/679(欧盟)比葡萄牙2014年4月16日第21号法律(临床研究法)更为宽松。这两种解决方案都假定参与者通过沉默表示同意,即使没有人真正试图专门告知他/她。这些观点确实与保护患者伦理权利的保障相冲突。在本文中,我们针对这些立场提出一种伦理替代方案。

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