...
首页> 外文期刊>Journal of medical ethics >Ethics of medical care and clinical research: a qualitative study of principal investigators in biomedical HIV prevention research
【24h】

Ethics of medical care and clinical research: a qualitative study of principal investigators in biomedical HIV prevention research

机译:医疗保健和临床研究的伦理:生物医学艾滋病毒预防研究中主要研究人员的定性研究

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

In clinical research there is a tension between the role of a doctor, who must serve the best interests of the patient, and the role of the researcher, who must produce knowledge that may not have any immediate benefits for the research participant. This tension is exacerbated in HIV research in low and middle income countries, which frequently uncovers comorbidities other than the condition under study. Some bioethicists argue that as the goals of medicine and those of research are distinct, it is a mistake for researchers to assume therapeutic responsibilities while engaging in research. Others propose that there is a duty of care, but disagree as to how this is limited and specified. In this qualitative study, principal investigators from HIV prevention trials discuss their experience of providing medical benefits to participants within the context of conducting research into HIV biomedical prevention technologies. They describe the limitations imposed at times by funders and at times by infrastructure constraints, and canvass the importance of ancillary care provision and capacity building in trial communities. The views of the principal investigators are compatible with the perspective that there is a duty of care, limited by the nature of the research, the depth of the relationship between research and participant, and the capacity of the research site. The therapeutic orientation in HIV prevention trial appears to be indivisible from competent research practise by making concrete and appropriate benefits available to trial participants and their communities that support rather than compete with local infrastructure.
机译:在临床研究中,医生的角色(必须服务于患者的最大利益)与研究人员的角色(必须产生对研究参与者没有直接好处的知识)之间存在紧张关系。在低收入和中等收入国家的艾滋病毒研究中,这种紧张局势更加恶化,除了发现的疾病之外,这种疾病还经常发现合并症。一些生物伦理学家认为,由于医学和研究的目标是不同的,研究人员在从事研究时承担治疗责任是错误的。其他人则提出了谨慎的义务,但是对于如何限制和指定这种谨慎的观点却意见分歧。在这项定性研究中,来自HIV预防试验的主要研究人员讨论了他们在对HIV生物医学预防技术进行研究的背景下为参与者提供医疗益处的经验。他们描述了有时由出资者施加的限制,有时是由基础设施的限制所施加的限制,并探讨了辅助医疗提供和试验社区能力建设的重要性。主要研究者的观点与研究职责,研究性质,研究与参与者之间关系的深度以及研究地点的能力所限制的谨慎义务的观点是一致的。通过向试验参与者及其所在社区提供具体和适当的利益,而不是与当地基础设施进行竞争,可以将艾滋病预防试验中的治疗方向与有效的研究实践区分开。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

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