Switch to: References

Add citations

You must login to add citations.
  1. Permitting Patients to Pay for Participation in Clinical Trials: The Advent of the P4 Trial.David Shaw, Guido de Wert, Wybo Dondorp, David Townend, Gerard Bos & Michel van Gelder - 2017 - Medicine, Health Care and Philosophy 20 (2):219-227.
    In this article we explore the ethical issues raised by permitting patients to pay for participation in clinical trials, and discuss whether there are any categorical objections to this practice. We address key considerations concerning payment for participation in trials, including patient autonomy, risk/benefit and justice, taking account of two previous critiques of the ethics of P4. We conclude that such trials could be ethical under certain strict conditions, but only if other potential sources of funding have first been explored (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • Donor-Funded Research: Permissible, Not Perfect.Mike King & Angela Ballantyne - 2019 - Journal of Medical Ethics 45 (1):36-40.
    Donor-funded research is research funded by private donors in exchange for research-related benefits, such as trial participation or access to the trial intervention. This has been pejoratively referred to as ‘pay to play’ research, and criticised as unethical. We outline three models of donor-funded research, and argue for their permissibility on the grounds of personal liberty, their capacity to facilitate otherwise unfunded health research and their consistency with current ethical standards for research. We defend this argument against objections that donor-funded (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • A Plutocratic Proposal: An Ethical Way for Rich Patients to Pay for a Place on a Clinical Trial.Alexander Masters & Dominic Nutt - 2017 - Journal of Medical Ethics 43 (11):730-736.
    Many potential therapeutic agents are discarded before they are tested in humans. These are not quack medications. They are drugs and other interventions that have been developed by responsible scientists in respectable companies or universities and are often backed up by publications in peer-reviewed journals. These possible treatments might ease suffering and prolong the lives of innumerable patients, yet they have been put aside. In this paper, we outline a novel mechanism—the Plutocratic Proposal—to revive such neglected research and fund early (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   3 citations