Tania Manríquez Roa, Felicitas Holzer, Julian März, Nikola Biller-Andorno
{"title":"An International Delphi Study on the Challenges of Self-Experimentation for Medical Research Ethics.","authors":"Tania Manríquez Roa, Felicitas Holzer, Julian März, Nikola Biller-Andorno","doi":"10.1177/15562646261451528","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Self-experimentation is a research practice that might advance scientific progress and benefit populations worldwide. However, it also carries risks, both in terms of potential harm to researchers and the possibility of undermining research. This study seeks to explore expert perspectives on self-experimentation, examining its potential benefits and risks, identifying areas of consensus and divergence, and highlighting key themes to inform debates on its role in medical research.We conducted a three-round online Delphi study with a multi-regional panel of 16 experts with varying views on self-experimentation. The panel assessed, commented on, and proposed revisions to statements drafted by both the authors and panellists.Consensus was reached on several key points. Experts agreed that self-experimentation can serve as a means of gathering preliminary evidence, accelerating research, and assessing the technical feasibility of an intervention. However, there was also agreement that self-experimentation can harm scientists, has limited scientific value, and may produce unreliable data.</p>","PeriodicalId":520668,"journal":{"name":"Journal of empirical research on human research ethics : JERHRE","volume":" ","pages":"330-351"},"PeriodicalIF":1.1000,"publicationDate":"2026-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of empirical research on human research ethics : JERHRE","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/15562646261451528","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2026/6/17 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Self-experimentation is a research practice that might advance scientific progress and benefit populations worldwide. However, it also carries risks, both in terms of potential harm to researchers and the possibility of undermining research. This study seeks to explore expert perspectives on self-experimentation, examining its potential benefits and risks, identifying areas of consensus and divergence, and highlighting key themes to inform debates on its role in medical research.We conducted a three-round online Delphi study with a multi-regional panel of 16 experts with varying views on self-experimentation. The panel assessed, commented on, and proposed revisions to statements drafted by both the authors and panellists.Consensus was reached on several key points. Experts agreed that self-experimentation can serve as a means of gathering preliminary evidence, accelerating research, and assessing the technical feasibility of an intervention. However, there was also agreement that self-experimentation can harm scientists, has limited scientific value, and may produce unreliable data.