{"title":"临床研究中的社会价值误区。","authors":"Jake Earl, Liza Dawson, Annette Rid","doi":"10.1080/15265161.2024.2371119","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Clinical researchers should help respect the autonomy and promote the well-being of prospective study participants by helping them make voluntary, informed decisions about enrollment. However, participants often exhibit poor understanding of important information about clinical research. Bioethicists have given special attention to \"misconceptions\" about clinical research that can compromise participants' decision-making, most notably the \"therapeutic misconception.\" These misconceptions typically involve false beliefs about a study's purpose, or risks or potential benefits for participants. In this article, we describe a misconception involving false beliefs about a study's potential benefits for non-participants, or its expected social value. This social value misconception can compromise altruistically motivated participants' decision-making, potentially threatening their autonomy and well-being. We show how the social value misconception raises ethical concerns for inherently low-value research, hyped research, and even ordinary research, and advocate for empirical and normative work to help understand and counteract this misconception's potential negative impacts on participants.</p>","PeriodicalId":50962,"journal":{"name":"American Journal of Bioethics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":17.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Social Value Misconception in Clinical Research.\",\"authors\":\"Jake Earl, Liza Dawson, Annette Rid\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/15265161.2024.2371119\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Clinical researchers should help respect the autonomy and promote the well-being of prospective study participants by helping them make voluntary, informed decisions about enrollment. However, participants often exhibit poor understanding of important information about clinical research. Bioethicists have given special attention to \\\"misconceptions\\\" about clinical research that can compromise participants' decision-making, most notably the \\\"therapeutic misconception.\\\" These misconceptions typically involve false beliefs about a study's purpose, or risks or potential benefits for participants. In this article, we describe a misconception involving false beliefs about a study's potential benefits for non-participants, or its expected social value. This social value misconception can compromise altruistically motivated participants' decision-making, potentially threatening their autonomy and well-being. We show how the social value misconception raises ethical concerns for inherently low-value research, hyped research, and even ordinary research, and advocate for empirical and normative work to help understand and counteract this misconception's potential negative impacts on participants.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":50962,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"American Journal of Bioethics\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":17.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-07-15\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"American Journal of Bioethics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"98\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/15265161.2024.2371119\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"哲学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"ETHICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"American Journal of Bioethics","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/15265161.2024.2371119","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ETHICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
The Social Value Misconception in Clinical Research.
Clinical researchers should help respect the autonomy and promote the well-being of prospective study participants by helping them make voluntary, informed decisions about enrollment. However, participants often exhibit poor understanding of important information about clinical research. Bioethicists have given special attention to "misconceptions" about clinical research that can compromise participants' decision-making, most notably the "therapeutic misconception." These misconceptions typically involve false beliefs about a study's purpose, or risks or potential benefits for participants. In this article, we describe a misconception involving false beliefs about a study's potential benefits for non-participants, or its expected social value. This social value misconception can compromise altruistically motivated participants' decision-making, potentially threatening their autonomy and well-being. We show how the social value misconception raises ethical concerns for inherently low-value research, hyped research, and even ordinary research, and advocate for empirical and normative work to help understand and counteract this misconception's potential negative impacts on participants.
期刊介绍:
The American Journal of Bioethics (AJOB) is a renowned global publication focused on bioethics. It tackles pressing ethical challenges in the realm of health sciences.
With a commitment to the original vision of bioethics, AJOB explores the social consequences of advancements in biomedicine. It sparks meaningful discussions that have proved invaluable to a wide range of professionals, including judges, senators, journalists, scholars, and educators.
AJOB covers various areas of interest, such as the ethical implications of clinical research, ensuring access to healthcare services, and the responsible handling of medical records and data.
The journal welcomes contributions in the form of target articles presenting original research, open peer commentaries facilitating a dialogue, book reviews, and responses to open peer commentaries.
By presenting insightful and authoritative content, AJOB continues to shape the field of bioethics and engage diverse stakeholders in crucial conversations about the intersection of medicine, ethics, and society.