Switch to: References

Add citations

You must login to add citations.
  1. Clinical Equipoise: Actual or Hypothetical Disagreement?Scott Gelfand - 2013 - Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 38 (6):590--604.
    In his influential 1987 essay, “Equipoise and The Ethics of Randomized Clinical Research,” Benjamin Freedman argued that Charles Fried’s theoretical equipoise requirement threatened clinical research because it was overwhelmingly fragile and rendered unethical too many randomized clinical trials. Freedman, therefore, proposed an alternative requirement, the clinical equipoise requirement, which is now considered to be the fundamental or guiding principle concerning the ethics of enrolling patients in randomized clinical trials. In this essay I argue that Freedman’s clinical equipoise requirement is ambiguous (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   4 citations  
  • Uncertainty and the ethics of clinical trials.Sven Ove Hansson - 2006 - Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics 27 (2):149-167.
    A probabilistic explication is offered of equipoise and uncertainty in clinical trials. In order to be useful in the justification of clinical trials, equipoise has to be interpreted in terms of overlapping probability distributions of possible treatment outcomes, rather than point estimates representing expectation values. Uncertainty about treatment outcomes is shown to be a necessary but insufficient condition for the ethical defensibility of clinical trials. Additional requirements are proposed for the nature of that uncertainty. The indecisiveness of our criteria for (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   9 citations  
  • 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  
  • Ethical challenges in clinical studies with adaptive design in oncology.Norbert W. Paul & Hamideh Mahdiani - 2023 - Clinical Ethics 18 (2):148-154.
    Novel immune therapies are increasingly based on the molecular differentiation of disease patterns. The related clinical studies are thus more often characterized by the so-called adaptive study designs (umbrella or basket studies including platform studies), which are continuously adjusted based on novel results. This paper analyses new study designs beyond the often-postulated need for regulation in order to identify ethical problems based on typical structural features and to—whenever possible—suggest solutions. To do so, it addresses the following topics: the relationship between (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • Equipoise and the Criteria for Reasonable Action.Emily L. Evans & Alex John London - 2006 - Journal of Law, Medicine and Ethics 34 (2):441-450.
    Critics of clinical equipoise have long argued that it represents an overly permissive, and therefore morally unacceptable, mechanism for resolving the tensions inherent in clinical research. In particular, the equipoise requirement is often attacked on the grounds that it is not sufficiently responsive to the interests of individual patients. In this paper, we outline a view of equipoise that not only withstands a stronger version of this objection, which was recently articulated by Deborah Hellman, but also plays important roles in (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   5 citations  
  • Normality, Disease, and Enhancement.Theodore M. Benditt - 2007 - In Harold Kincaid & Jennifer McKitrick (eds.), Establishing medical reality: Methodological and metaphysical issues in philosophy of medicine. Springer Publishing Company. pp. 13-21.
    The vagueness or imprecision of ‘the normal’ allows it to be exploited for various purposes and political ends. It is conspicuous in both medicine and athletics; I am going to try to say something about the normal in each of these areas. In medicine the idea of the normal is often deployed in understanding what constitutes disease and hence, as some see it, in determining the role of physicians, in determining what is or ought to be covered by insurance, and (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   3 citations  
  • Destabilizing the 'equipoise' framework in clinical trials: prioritizing non-exploitation as an ethical framework in clinical research.Douglas E. Schlichting - 2010 - Nursing Philosophy 11 (4):271-279.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  • Data and Safety Monitoring Boards: Some Enduring Questions.Charles J. Kowalski & Jan L. Hewett - 2009 - Journal of Law, Medicine and Ethics 37 (3):496-506.
    Data Safety and Monitoring Boards were introduced in the 1960s to monitor data in clinical trials to ensure subject safety. It was thought important that DSMB members be experts in the field of interest, but not otherwise involved in the study in order to maximize objectivity. Since then, the use of DSMBs has increased dramatically, and their scope has expanded to include scientific issues — in particular, to avoid bias that can result when trials are stopped early because of evidence (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • Timing invitations to participate in clinical research: Preliminary versus informed consent.Ana Smith Iltis - 2005 - Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 30 (1):89 – 106.
    This article addresses the impact of the potential conflict between the roles of physicians who are both clinicians and researchers on the recruitment of persons into research trials. It has been proposedthat a physician breaches inter-role confidentiality when he or she uses information gathered in his or her clinical role to inform patients about trials for which they may be eligible and that clinician-researchers should adopt a model of preliminary consent to be approached about research prior to commencing a clinical (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  • Evidence-based equipoise and research responsiveness.Scott D. Halpern - 2006 - American Journal of Bioethics 6 (4):1 – 4.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   4 citations