• 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

相似文献

1
The ethics of resource allocation in translational genomic medicine.转化基因组医学中的资源分配伦理
J Community Genet. 2022 Oct;13(5):539-545. doi: 10.1007/s12687-021-00517-4. Epub 2021 Mar 12.
2
From book to bedside? A critical perspective on the debate about "translational bioethics".从书本到床边?关于“转化生物伦理学”争论的批判性视角。
Bioethics. 2024 Mar;38(3):177-186. doi: 10.1111/bioe.13240. Epub 2023 Nov 27.
3
Translational ethics: an analytical framework of translational movements between theory and practice and a sketch of a comprehensive approach.转化医学伦理学:理论与实践之间转化运动的分析框架及一种综合方法概述
BMC Med Ethics. 2014 Sep 30;15:71. doi: 10.1186/1472-6939-15-71.
4
The future of Cochrane Neonatal.考克兰新生儿协作网的未来。
Early Hum Dev. 2020 Nov;150:105191. doi: 10.1016/j.earlhumdev.2020.105191. Epub 2020 Sep 12.
5
6
A theory of international bioethics: multiculturalism, postmodernism, and the bankruptcy of fundamentalism.一种国际生物伦理学理论:多元文化主义、后现代主义与原教旨主义的破产
Kennedy Inst Ethics J. 1998 Sep;8(3):201-31. doi: 10.1353/ken.1998.0017.
7
A theory of international bioethics: the negotiable and the non-negotiable.国际生物伦理学理论:可协商与不可协商的内容。
Kennedy Inst Ethics J. 1998 Sep;8(3):233-73. doi: 10.1353/ken.1998.0018.
8
Ethics and resource allocation: an economist's view.伦理与资源分配:一位经济学家的观点。
Soc Sci Med. 1986;22(11):1167-74. doi: 10.1016/0277-9536(86)90183-8.
9
Fair Resource Allocation to Health Research: Priority Topics for Bioethics Scholarship.卫生研究的公平资源分配:生物伦理学学术研究的优先主题。
Bioethics. 2017 Jul;31(6):454-466. doi: 10.1111/bioe.12350. Epub 2017 Apr 3.
10
The Symbiotic Relationship Between Scientific Quality and Animal Research Ethics.科学质量与动物研究伦理之间的共生关系。
ILAR J. 2021 Sep 24;60(3):334-340. doi: 10.1093/ilar/ilab023.

引用本文的文献

1
Resource allocation in genetic and genomic medicine.遗传与基因组医学中的资源分配
J Community Genet. 2022 Oct;13(5):463-466. doi: 10.1007/s12687-022-00608-w.

本文引用的文献

1
Macchiarini case: seven researchers are guilty of scientific misconduct, rules Karolinska's president.马基亚里尼事件:卡罗林斯卡学院院长裁定,七名研究人员存在科研不端行为。
BMJ. 2018 Jun 27;361:k2816. doi: 10.1136/bmj.k2816.
2
Resolving the "Cost-Effective but Unaffordable" Paradox: Estimating the Health Opportunity Costs of Nonmarginal Budget Impacts.解决“性价比高但负担不起”的悖论:估算非边际预算影响的健康机会成本。
Value Health. 2018 Mar;21(3):266-275. doi: 10.1016/j.jval.2017.10.006. Epub 2018 Jan 4.
3
Cancer drugs: high price, uncertain value.抗癌药物:价格高昂,价值存疑。
BMJ. 2017 Oct 4;359:j4543. doi: 10.1136/bmj.j4543.
4
Person Centered Care and Personalized Medicine: Irreconcilable Opposites or Potential Companions?以患者为中心的护理与个性化医疗:不可调和的对立面还是潜在的伙伴?
Health Care Anal. 2019 Mar;27(1):45-59. doi: 10.1007/s10728-017-0347-5.
5
In Defense of a Social Value Requirement for Clinical Research.为临床研究的社会价值要求辩护。
Bioethics. 2017 Feb;31(2):77-86. doi: 10.1111/bioe.12325.
6
Ethical imperatives of timely access to orphan drugs: is possible to reconcile economic incentives and patients' health needs?及时获取罕见病药物的伦理要求:能否协调经济激励与患者健康需求?
Orphanet J Rare Dis. 2017 Jan 5;12(1):1. doi: 10.1186/s13023-016-0551-7.
7
The Learning Healthcare System: Where are we now? A systematic review.学习型医疗保健系统:我们目前处于什么阶段?一项系统综述。
J Biomed Inform. 2016 Dec;64:87-92. doi: 10.1016/j.jbi.2016.09.018. Epub 2016 Sep 28.
8
Translational research-the need of a new bioethics approach.转化医学研究——一种新的生物伦理学方法的必要性。
J Transl Med. 2016 Jan 15;14:16. doi: 10.1186/s12967-016-0773-4.
9
What is translational genomics? An expanded research agenda for improving individual and population health.什么是转化基因组学?改善个体和群体健康的扩展研究议程。
Appl Transl Genom. 2014 Dec;3(4):82-83. doi: 10.1016/j.atg.2014.09.006.
10
Right-to-try laws: hope, hype, and unintended consequences.“有权尝试”法律:希望、炒作及意外后果。
Ann Intern Med. 2015 Nov 17;163(10):796-7. doi: 10.7326/M15-0148. Epub 2015 Sep 29.

转化基因组医学中的资源分配伦理

The ethics of resource allocation in translational genomic medicine.

作者信息

Munthe Christian

机构信息

Department of Philosophy, Linguistics and Theory of Science, University of Gothenburg, Box 200, SE-40540, Gothenburg, Sweden.

出版信息

J Community Genet. 2022 Oct;13(5):539-545. doi: 10.1007/s12687-021-00517-4. Epub 2021 Mar 12.

DOI:10.1007/s12687-021-00517-4
PMID:33710592
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9530098/
Abstract

Two basic models of the rationale of translational genomic medicine (TGM)-the "Lab Assisting Clinic" (LAC) and the "Clinic Assisting Lab" (CAL) models-are distinguished, in order to address the ethics of allocating resources for TGM. The basic challenge of justifying such allocation is for TGM to demonstrate sufficient benefits to justify the opportunity cost of lost benefits in other areas of medicine or research. While suggested ethics frameworks for translational medicine build on clearly distinguishing these models, actual TGM typically blurs them. Due to lack of and difficulty in collecting evidence, prospects for justifying the LAC model currently seem poor, but this difficulty might be overcome by more research that tests the very concept of TGM. The CAL model aims to thus advance science, but is ridden by ethical hazard, undermining attempts at justification. This leaves the notion of running bona fide controlled trials of entire TGM concepts that have been justified from the perspective of clinical and research ethics (and approved by IRBs). It remains, however, an open question if the outcomes of such trials will demonstrate benefits that can justify the investment in TGM. To advance the prospect of such justification further, charting of the cost-benefit profile of TGM compared to alternative health investments would be helpful.

摘要

为探讨转化基因组医学(TGM)资源分配的伦理问题,区分了转化基因组医学基本原理的两种基本模式——“实验室辅助临床”(LAC)模式和“临床辅助实验室”(CAL)模式。为这种资源分配提供合理依据的基本挑战在于,TGM要证明有足够的益处,以证明在医学或研究的其他领域损失益处的机会成本是合理的。虽然转化医学的伦理框架建议基于明确区分这些模式,但实际的TGM通常会模糊它们。由于缺乏证据以及收集证据存在困难,目前为LAC模式提供合理依据的前景似乎不佳,但通过更多检验TGM概念本身的研究,这一困难或许可以克服。CAL模式旨在推动科学发展,但存在道德风险,这削弱了提供合理依据的尝试。这就引出了从临床和研究伦理角度(并经机构审查委员会批准)对整个TGM概念进行真正对照试验的想法。然而,此类试验的结果是否会证明其益处足以证明对TGM的投资合理,仍是一个悬而未决的问题。为进一步推进这种合理依据的前景,绘制TGM与其他健康投资相比的成本效益概况将会有所帮助。