Switch to: References

Add citations

You must login to add citations.
  1. Implementing Post-Trial Access Plans for HIV Prevention Research.Amy Paul, Maria W. Merritt & Jeremy Sugarman - 2018 - Journal of Medical Ethics 44 (5):354-358.
    Ethics guidance increasingly recognises that researchers and sponsors have obligations to consider provisions for post-trial access to interventions that are found to be beneficial in research. Yet, there is little information regarding whether and how such plans can actually be implemented. Understanding practical experiences of developing and implementing these plans is critical to both optimising their implementation and informing conceptual work related to PTA. This viewpoint is informed by experiences with developing and implementing PTA plans for six large-scale multicentre HIV (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • MRCT Center Post-Trial Responsibilities Framework Continued Access to Investigational Medicines. Guidance Document. Version 1.0, December 2016.Carmen Aldinger, Barbara Bierer, Rebecca Li, Luann Van Campen, Mark Barnes, Eileen Bedell, Amanda Brown-Inz, Robin Gibbs, Deborah Henderson, Christopher Kabacinski, Laurie Letvak, Susan Manoff, Ignacio Mastroleo, Ellie Okada, Usharani Pingali, Wasana Prasitsuebsai, Hans Spiegel, Daniel Wang, Susan Briggs Watson & Marc Wilenzik - 2016 - The Multi-Regional Clinical Trials Center of the Brigham and Women’s Hospital and Harvard (MRCT Center).
    I. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The MRCT Center Post-trial Responsibilities: Continued Access to an Investigational Medicine Framework outlines a case-based, principled, stakeholder approach to evaluate and guide ethical responsibilities to provide continued access to an investigational medicine at the conclusion of a patient’s participation in a clinical trial. The Post-trial Responsibilities (PTR) Framework includes this Guidance Document as well as the accompanying Toolkit. A 41-member international multi-stakeholder Workgroup convened by the Multi-Regional Clinical Trials Center of Brigham and Women’s Hospital and Harvard University (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • Health, Priority to the Worse Off, and Time.Anders Herlitz - 2018 - Medicine, Health Care and Philosophy 21 (4):517-527.
    It is a common view that benefits to the worse off should be given priority when health benefits are distributed. This paper addresses how to understand who is worse off in this context when individuals are differently well off at different times. The paper argues that the view that this judgment about who is worse off should be based solely on how well off individuals are when their complete lives are considered (i.e. 'the complete lives view') is implausible in this (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • Answering the Empirical Challenge to Arguments for Universal Health Coverage Based in Health Equity.Lynette Reid - 2016 - Public Health Ethics 9 (3):231-243.
    Temkin asks how we should distribute resources between the social determinants of health and health care; Sreenivasan argues that if our goal is fair opportunity, funding universal health coverage is the wrong policy. He argues that social equality in health has not improved under UHC and concludes that fair opportunity would be better served by using the resources to address the SDOH instead. His criticism applies more broadly than he claims: it applies to any argument for UHC based on health (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations