Weijer C
CMAJ. 1995 Apr 15;152(8):1195-7.
The three claims put forward by Dr. Roger Poisson to rationalize his enrollment of ineligible subjects in clinical trials do not justify research fraud. None the less, certain lessons for the conduct of clinical research can be learned from the affair: experimental therapies should be made available to technically ineligible subjects when no effective therapy exists for their disease; further research must investigate the possible benefits of clinical-trial participation; broadly based, pragmatic trials must be regarded as the ideal model; and each eligibility criterion in a clinical-trial protocol should be justified.
罗杰·泊松博士为其在临床试验中招募不合格受试者进行合理化而提出的三项主张并不能成为研究欺诈的正当理由。尽管如此,从该事件中仍可汲取一些关于开展临床研究的经验教训:当某种疾病不存在有效治疗方法时,应向技术上不合格的受试者提供实验性疗法;进一步的研究必须调查参与临床试验可能带来的益处;广泛、务实的试验应被视为理想模式;并且临床试验方案中的每项入选标准都应具有合理性。