Suppr超能文献

公平的受试者选择的四个方面。

Four Faces of Fair Subject Selection.

机构信息

University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill.

出版信息

Am J Bioeth. 2020 Feb;20(2):5-19. doi: 10.1080/15265161.2019.1701731.

Abstract

Although the principle of fair subject selection is a widely recognized requirement of ethical clinical research, it often yields conflicting imperatives, thus raising major ethical dilemmas regarding participant selection. In this paper, we diagnose the source of this problem, arguing that the principle of fair subject selection is best understood as a bundle of four distinct sub-principles, each with normative force and each yielding distinct imperatives: (1) fair inclusion; (2) fair burden sharing; (3) fair opportunity; and (4) fair distribution of third-party risks. We first map out these distinct sub-principles, and then identify the ways in which they yield conflicting imperatives for the design of inclusion and exclusion criteria, and the recruitment of participants. We then offer guidance for how decision makers should navigate these conflicting imperatives to ensure that participants are selected fairly.

摘要

虽然公平的受试者选择原则是伦理临床研究的一个广泛认可的要求,但它往往会产生相互冲突的命令,从而对参与者的选择产生重大的伦理困境。在本文中,我们诊断了这个问题的根源,认为公平的受试者选择原则最好被理解为一组四个不同的子原则,每个子原则都有规范的力量,每个子原则都产生不同的命令:(1)公平包容;(2)公平负担分担;(3)公平机会;(4)第三方风险的公平分配。我们首先阐述了这些不同的子原则,然后确定了它们在制定纳入和排除标准以及招募参与者方面产生相互冲突的命令的方式。然后,我们为决策者提供了如何驾驭这些相互冲突的命令的指导,以确保公平地选择参与者。

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