Title

When Are Research Risks Reasonable in Relation to Anticipated Benefits?

Document Type

Article

Publication Date

6-2004

Journal

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.

Share

COinS