Three steps to protecting pediatric research participants from excessive risks.

David Wendler
{"title":"Three steps to protecting pediatric research participants from excessive risks.","authors":"David Wendler","doi":"10.1371/journal.pctr.0010025","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"There is growing recognition that pediatric research is needed to improve pediatric medicine [1,2]. Research guidelines try to accommodate this need by allowing children to be enrolled in research when it offers an appropriate risk–benefit profile. These guidelines allow children to undergo research interventions that offer a compensating potential for clinical benefit. Most guidelines also allow children to undergo research interventions that do not offer a compensating potential for clinical benefit, provided the risks are acceptably low. \n \nTo implement this threshold on acceptable risks, review committees, known variously as ethics review committees, institutional review boards, or research ethics committees (RECs), must make three related assessments. They must identify the research interventions included in the study under review, determine which, if any, of the research interventions fail to offer participants a compensating potential for clinical benefit, and ensure that these interventions do not pose excessive risks. \n \nThese steps, while vital to protecting pediatric participants from excessive risks, have not been systematically described. This essay attempts to address this gap by describing the assessment appropriate for each of these three steps.","PeriodicalId":87416,"journal":{"name":"PLoS clinical trials","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2006-09-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1371/journal.pctr.0010025","citationCount":"8","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"PLoS clinical trials","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pctr.0010025","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 8

Abstract

There is growing recognition that pediatric research is needed to improve pediatric medicine [1,2]. Research guidelines try to accommodate this need by allowing children to be enrolled in research when it offers an appropriate risk–benefit profile. These guidelines allow children to undergo research interventions that offer a compensating potential for clinical benefit. Most guidelines also allow children to undergo research interventions that do not offer a compensating potential for clinical benefit, provided the risks are acceptably low. To implement this threshold on acceptable risks, review committees, known variously as ethics review committees, institutional review boards, or research ethics committees (RECs), must make three related assessments. They must identify the research interventions included in the study under review, determine which, if any, of the research interventions fail to offer participants a compensating potential for clinical benefit, and ensure that these interventions do not pose excessive risks. These steps, while vital to protecting pediatric participants from excessive risks, have not been systematically described. This essay attempts to address this gap by describing the assessment appropriate for each of these three steps.
保护儿科研究参与者免受过度风险的三个步骤。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信