Equipoise and the Duty of Care in Clinical Research: A Philosophical Response to Our Critics
Authors:
Paul B. Miller a;
Charles Weijer b
| Affiliations: | a University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada |
| b University of Western Ontario, London, Ontario, Canada |
DOI:
10.1080/03605310701255735
Publication Frequency:
6 issues per year
Formats available:
HTML
(English)
:
PDF
(English)
You have:
FREE ACCESS
The circumstances under which this title is published have changed:
Reason for change: Changed Publisher
Now published by: Oxford University Press
Date of change: 2008
View Article:
View Article (PDF)
View Article (HTML)
Abstract
Franklin G. Miller and colleagues have stimulated renewed interest in research ethics through their work criticizing clinical equipoise. Over three years and some twenty articles, they have also worked to articulate a positive alternative view on norms governing the conduct of clinical research. Shared presuppositions underlie the positive and critical dimensions of Miller and colleagues' work. However, recognizing that constructive contributions to the field ought to enjoy priority, we presently scrutinize the constructive dimension of their work. We argue that it is wanting in several respects.
|
| Keywords: duty of care; equipoise; harm-benefit evaluation |
| view references (33) |

Download Citation
CiteULike
Del.icio.us
BibSonomy
Connotea