• 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

Individual autonomy and the double-blind controlled experiment: the case of desperate volunteers.

作者信息

Minogue B P, Palmer-Fernandez G, Udell L, Waller B N

机构信息

Department of Philosophy and religious Studies, Youngstown State University, OH 44555, USA.

出版信息

J Med Philos. 1995 Feb;20(1):43-55. doi: 10.1093/jmp/20.1.43.

DOI:10.1093/jmp/20.1.43
PMID:7738458
Abstract

This essay explores some concerns about the quality of informed consent in patients whose autonomy is diminished by fatal illness. It argues that patients with diminished autonomy cannot give free and voluntary consent, and that recruitment of such patients as subjects in human experimentation exploits their vulnerability in a morally objectionable way. Two options are given to overcome this objection: (i) recruit only those patients who desire to contribute to medical knowledge, rather than gain access to experimental treatment, or (ii) provide prospective subjects the choice to participate in standard double-blind study or receive the experimental treatment. Either option would guarantee that patients in desperate conditions are given a more meaningful choice and a richer freedom, and thus a higher quality of informed consent, than under standard randomized trials.

摘要

相似文献

1
Individual autonomy and the double-blind controlled experiment: the case of desperate volunteers.
J Med Philos. 1995 Feb;20(1):43-55. doi: 10.1093/jmp/20.1.43.
2
A desperate solution: individual autonomy and the double-blind controlled experiment.一种无奈的解决方案:个人自主性与双盲对照实验。
J Med Philos. 1995 Feb;20(1):57-64. doi: 10.1093/jmp/20.1.57.
3
Beyond voluntary consent: Hans Jonas on the moral requirements of human experimentation.超越自愿同意:汉斯·约纳斯论人体实验的道德要求。
J Med Ethics. 1993 Jun;19(2):99-103. doi: 10.1136/jme.19.2.99.
4
Ethics and placebo-controlled thrombolytic trials: the future.
Coron Artery Dis. 1991 Sep;2(7):849-52.
5
Consent to clinical research--adequately voluntary or substantially influenced?临床研究的同意——是充分自愿还是受到实质性影响?
J Med Ethics. 1996 Aug;22(4):232-7. doi: 10.1136/jme.22.4.232.
6
Consent and randomized clinical trials: are there moral or design problems?同意与随机临床试验:是否存在道德或设计问题?
J Med Philos. 1986 Nov;11(4):317-45. doi: 10.1093/jmp/11.4.317.
7
The ethics of randomized clinical trials.随机临床试验的伦理学
Am J Med. 1987 Feb;82(2):283-90. doi: 10.1016/0002-9343(87)90069-6.
8
An application of moral guidelines in human clinical trials to a study of a benzodiazepine compound as a hypnotic agent among the elderly.
Clin Res. 1977 Jan;25(1):1-7.
9
Is informed consent always necessary for randomized, controlled trials?随机对照试验是否总是需要获得知情同意?
N Engl J Med. 1999 Mar 11;340(10):804-7. doi: 10.1056/NEJM199903113401013.
10
The ethical problems of the open label extension study.开放标签扩展研究的伦理问题。
Camb Q Healthc Ethics. 1996 Summer;5(3):410-4. doi: 10.1017/s0963180100007210.

引用本文的文献

1
Motivation to participate and experiences of the informed consent process for randomized clinical trials in emergency obstetric care in Uganda.乌干达产科急诊中随机临床试验的参与动机和知情同意过程体验。
BMC Med Ethics. 2021 Jul 28;22(1):104. doi: 10.1186/s12910-021-00672-w.
2
Ethical Issues in Deep Brain Stimulation Research for Treatment-Resistant Depression: Focus on Risk and Consent.难治性抑郁症深部脑刺激研究中的伦理问题:聚焦风险与同意
AJOB Neurosci. 2011;2(1):29-36. doi: 10.1080/21507740.2010.533638.
3
Ethical issues in cardiac surgery.
心脏外科手术中的伦理问题。
Future Cardiol. 2012 May;8(3):451-65. doi: 10.2217/fca.11.91.
4
The decision making control instrument to assess voluntary consent.决策控制工具评估自愿同意。
Med Decis Making. 2011 Sep-Oct;31(5):730-41. doi: 10.1177/0272989X11398666. Epub 2011 Mar 14.
5
A direct comparison of research decision-making capacity: schizophrenia/schizoaffective, medically ill, and non-ill subjects.研究决策能力的直接比较:精神分裂症/分裂情感性障碍患者、内科疾病患者和非疾病受试者。
Schizophr Res. 2008 Feb;99(1-3):350-8. doi: 10.1016/j.schres.2007.11.022.
6
Should desperate volunteers be included in randomised controlled trials?绝望的志愿者是否应纳入随机对照试验?
J Med Ethics. 2006 Sep;32(9):548-53. doi: 10.1136/jme.2005.014282.
7
The ethics of placebo-controlled trials: a comparison of inert and active placebo controls.安慰剂对照试验的伦理学:惰性安慰剂对照与活性安慰剂对照的比较
World J Surg. 2005 May;29(5):610-4. doi: 10.1007/s00268-005-7621-7.
8
The promise of empirical research in the study of informed consent theory and practice.实证研究在知情同意理论与实践研究中的前景。
HEC Forum. 2004 Mar;16(1):53-71. doi: 10.1023/b:hecf.0000031780.66472.f4.
9
The ethics of randomised controlled trials from the perspectives of patients, the public, and healthcare professionals.从患者、公众和医疗保健专业人员角度看随机对照试验的伦理问题
BMJ. 1998 Oct 31;317(7167):1209-12. doi: 10.1136/bmj.317.7167.1209.