Title
When Are Research Risks Reasonable in Relation to Anticipated Benefits?
Document Type
Article
Publication Date
6-2004
Source
Nature Medicine
Volume
10
Issue
6
First Page
570
Last Page
573
URL with Digital Object Identifier
http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/nm0604-570
Abstract
The question "When are research risks reasonable in relation to anticipated benefits?" is at the heart of disputes in the ethics of clinical research. Institutional review boards are often criticized for inconsistent decision-making, a problem that is compounded by a number of contemporary controversies, including the ethics of research involving placebo controls, developing countries, incapable adults and emergency rooms. If this pressing ethical question is to be addressed in a principled way, then a systematic approach to the ethics of risk in research is required. Component analysis provides such a systematic approach.
Notes
Reprinted in: Bankert EA, Amdur RJ. Institutional Review Board: Management and Function (2nd ed.). 2006: 389-393.
Also reprinted in: Amdur RJ, Bankert EA. Institutional Review Board Member Handbook. 2007: 133-137.
Dr. Charles Weijer is currently a faculty member at The University of Western Ontario.