首页> 美国卫生研究院文献>Globalization and Health >Can context justify an ethical double standard for clinical research in developing countries?
【2h】

Can context justify an ethical double standard for clinical research in developing countries?

机译:背景是否可以为发展中国家进行临床研究的道德双重标准辩护?

代理获取
本网站仅为用户提供外文OA文献查询和代理获取服务,本网站没有原文。下单后我们将采用程序或人工为您竭诚获取高质量的原文,但由于OA文献来源多样且变更频繁,仍可能出现获取不到、文献不完整或与标题不符等情况,如果获取不到我们将提供退款服务。请知悉。

摘要

BackgroundThe design of clinical research deserves special caution so as to safeguard the rights of participating individuals. While the international community has agreed on ethical standards for the design of research, these frameworks still remain open to interpretation, revision and debate. Recently a breach in the consensus of how to apply these ethical standards to research in developing countries has occurred, notably beginning with the 1994 placebo-controlled trials to reduce maternal to child transmission of HIV-1 in Africa, Asia and the Caribbean. The design of these trials sparked intense debate with the inclusion of a placebo-control group despite the existence of a 'gold standard' and trial supporters grounded their justifications of the trial design on the context of scarcity in resource-poor settings.
机译:背景技术临床研究的设计应特别谨慎,以维护参与人员的权利。尽管国际社会已经就研究设计的道德标准达成了共识,但这些框架仍然有待解释,修改和辩论的余地。最近,在如何将这些道德标准应用到发展中国家的研究中,人们达成了共识,尤其是在1994年开始进行安慰剂对照试验以减少在非洲,亚洲和加勒比地区母婴传播HIV-1的试验中。尽管存在“黄金标准”,但这些试验的设计引发了激烈的辩论,其中包括一个安慰剂对照组,试验支持者将其试验设计的理由基于资源贫乏地区的稀缺性。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
代理获取

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号