Switch to: References

Add citations

You must login to add citations.
  1. Clinical equipoise: Why still the gold standard for randomized clinical trials?Charlemagne Asonganyi Folefac & Hugh Desmond - 2024 - Clinical Ethics 19 (1):1-11.
    The principle of clinical equipoise has been variously characterized by ethicists and clinicians as fundamentally flawed, a myth, and even a moral balm. Yet, the principle continues to be treated as the de facto gold standard for conducting randomized control trials in an ethical manner. Why do we hold on to clinical equipoise, despite its shortcomings being widely known and well-advertised? This paper reviews the most important arguments criticizing clinical equipoise as well as what the most prominent proposed alternatives are. (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • A MacIntyrean Critique of Theoretical Pluralism in Applied Ethics.Brandon Boesch - 2016 - American Journal of Bioethics 16 (9):41-43.
    According to the work of Alasdair MacIntyre, there is an incommensurability between different theories of normative ethics. MacIntyre’s view on the incommensurability of ethical discourse casts doubt upon the pluralistic proposal of Magelssen and colleagues, since the insights gained from the various theories will themselves be incommensurate with one another. However, since there are obvious benefits provided both by arguments for pluralism and the insights of Magelssen and colleagues, I utilize some later work of MacIntyre to offer an alternative means (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • Response to the Open Peer Commentaries on “Is There an Ethical Obligation to Disclose Controversial Risk? A Question From the ACCORD Trial”.Joseph P. DeMarco, Paul J. Ford, Dana J. Patton & Douglas O. Stewart - 2014 - American Journal of Bioethics 14 (4):W1 - W2.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • Do We Need Ethical Theory to Achieve Quality Critical Engagement in Clinical Ethics?Ainsley J. Newson & Rosalind McDougall - 2016 - American Journal of Bioethics 16 (9):43-45.
    This open peer commentary examines whether ethical theory is necessary for effective clinical ethics consultation. While acknowledging that knowledge of ethical theories can be helpful, it argues that high-quality critical engagement - rather than theoretical knowledge - is fundamental for good clinical ethics consultation. Drawing parallels with healthcare ethics education, the commentary suggests that critical analysis and reasoning skills can achieve key consultation functions while avoiding pitfalls like superficial application of theory or disconnection from moral intuitions.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark