東華大學圖書館 |

語系: 繁體中文

說明(常見問題)

回圖書館首頁

手機版館藏查詢

登入

回首頁

切換: 標籤 | MARC模式 | ISBD

Ethos and Regula in Contemporary Cli...

Waddell, Amanda.

FindBook

Google Book

Amazon

博客來

Ethos and Regula in Contemporary Clinical Research.

紀錄類型:	書目-語言資料,印刷品 : Monograph/item
正題名/作者:	Ethos and Regula in Contemporary Clinical Research./
作者:	Waddell, Amanda.
面頁冊數:	62 p.
附註:	Source: Masters Abstracts International, Volume: 50-05, page: 3114.
Contained By:	Masters Abstracts International50-05.
標題:	Health Sciences, Medical Ethics. -
電子資源:	http://pqdd.sinica.edu.tw/twdaoapp/servlet/advanced?query=1509444
ISBN:	9781267305619

Ethos and Regula in Contemporary Clinical Research.
Waddell, Amanda.

Ethos and Regula in Contemporary Clinical Research. - 62 p.

Source: Masters Abstracts International, Volume: 50-05, page: 3114.

Thesis (M.S.)--Arizona State University, 2012.

With new trends in drug development and testing, it must be determined whether the current state of balance of ethos (the moral norm) and regula (the legal framework) can successfully protect patients while keeping the door to scientific innovation open. The rise of the Clinician Investigator (CI) in both academic and private research introduces a challenge to the protection of subjects in the conflicting dual role of physician and scientist. Despite the constant evolution of regulation and ethical standards, questions about the roles' combined effectiveness in relation to this challenge persist. Carl Elliot describes the suicide of a patient-subject enrolled in an industry-funded physician-run anti-psychotic pharmaceutical drug trial in a 2010 Mother Jones article. Elliot provides a personal account of discrepancies seen in the ethical principles of beneficence, respect for subjects and justice. Through analysis of the problems presented in the case as a model for potential dangers in clinical research, the effectiveness of ethics and law in protecting human subjects is examined. While the lag between ethical standard and regulation has historically shown to cause similar issues, the misconception of current regulation and ethical standards may be contributing to the decrease in subject protections. After IRB approval of subject protections in the research protocol, CIs have been shown to downgrade their responsibility to maintaining ethos through the course of the trial. And, despite their experience in patient-centered ethos as a physician, CIs may be inclined to substitute these values for the ethos of a researcher, with the goal to avoid therapeutic misconception. Maintaining personal responsibility for subjects beyond regulatory structure, and promoting the welfare of the subjects in regards to the ethical standard of research investigators, will provide added security for subjects and decrease opportunity for exploitation in future research.

ISBN: 9781267305619Subjects--Topical Terms:

1669715
Health Sciences, Medical Ethics.

Ethos and Regula in Contemporary Clinical Research.
LDR:02833nam a2200289 4500 001 1960810
005 20140701144627.5
008 150210s2012 ||||||||||||||||| ||eng d
020 $a 9781267305619
035 $a (MiAaPQ)AAI1509444
035 $a AAI1509444
040 $a MiAaPQ $c MiAaPQ
100 1 $a Waddell, Amanda. $3 2096547
245 1 0 $a Ethos and Regula in Contemporary Clinical Research.
300 $a 62 p.
500 $a Source: Masters Abstracts International, Volume: 50-05, page: 3114.
500 $a Adviser: Jason S. Robert.
502 $a Thesis (M.S.)--Arizona State University, 2012.
520 $a With new trends in drug development and testing, it must be determined whether the current state of balance of ethos (the moral norm) and regula (the legal framework) can successfully protect patients while keeping the door to scientific innovation open. The rise of the Clinician Investigator (CI) in both academic and private research introduces a challenge to the protection of subjects in the conflicting dual role of physician and scientist. Despite the constant evolution of regulation and ethical standards, questions about the roles' combined effectiveness in relation to this challenge persist. Carl Elliot describes the suicide of a patient-subject enrolled in an industry-funded physician-run anti-psychotic pharmaceutical drug trial in a 2010 Mother Jones article. Elliot provides a personal account of discrepancies seen in the ethical principles of beneficence, respect for subjects and justice. Through analysis of the problems presented in the case as a model for potential dangers in clinical research, the effectiveness of ethics and law in protecting human subjects is examined. While the lag between ethical standard and regulation has historically shown to cause similar issues, the misconception of current regulation and ethical standards may be contributing to the decrease in subject protections. After IRB approval of subject protections in the research protocol, CIs have been shown to downgrade their responsibility to maintaining ethos through the course of the trial. And, despite their experience in patient-centered ethos as a physician, CIs may be inclined to substitute these values for the ethos of a researcher, with the goal to avoid therapeutic misconception. Maintaining personal responsibility for subjects beyond regulatory structure, and promoting the welfare of the subjects in regards to the ethical standard of research investigators, will provide added security for subjects and decrease opportunity for exploitation in future research.
590 $a School code: 0010.
650 4 $a Health Sciences, Medical Ethics. $3 1669715
650 4 $a Ethics. $3 517264
650 4 $a Law. $3 600858
690 $a 0497
690 $a 0394
690 $a 0398
710 2 $a Arizona State University. $b Biology. $3 1673500
773 0 $t Masters Abstracts International $g 50-05.
790 $a 0010
791 $a M.S.
792 $a 2012
793 $a English
856 4 0 $u http://pqdd.sinica.edu.tw/twdaoapp/servlet/advanced?query=1509444