Search PubMed⌕ Search

PubMed · 10874864

[Randomize the first patient?].

Abstract

Therapeutic innovation requires rigorous assessment, to fulfil regulatory and ethical constraints. The ideal time for this assessment in the therapeutic progress story is a complex question, mixing individual and collective ethical principles. Randomisation of the first patient is always, at least theoretically, a current issue, extending beyond drug research to reach the wider field of technical innovation. Broad information of consumers, their involvement in clinical research policy, and specific training for prescribers, could be the conditions to make clinical research ethically acceptable.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

F Gueyffier. 2000-04-15. [Randomize the first patient?].. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/10874864/

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

[A separation of public health ethics from medical ethics].

Until now there are only a few approaches in the German-speaking realm to establish an explicit ethical framework for moral issues of public health--although a need for public health ethics in times of SARS and avian flu is obvious. One deficit of the discussion so far is that there is no systematic separation of medical ethics and public health ethics. Thus, the core and interdisciplinary focus of public health is often not met. However, to frame discussions of moral issues within a specific public health ethics framework seems to be fruitful. This paper deals with the conceptual differences of medical ethics and public health ethics. The discussion helps both applied ethical discourses to sharpen their focus and strengthen their appeal. The author develops and presents a conceptual and normative frame for public health ethics and offers a concise set of ethical principles for the discussion of moral challenges in public health.

Ethics, Medical↗