在知情同意例外情况下进行的急诊研究中,入组临床医生的作用。

Theoretical medicine and bioethics Pub Date : 2025-06-01 Epub Date: 2025-04-01 DOI:10.1007/s11017-025-09710-9
Katherine Sahan, Ethan Cowan, Mark Sheehan
{"title":"在知情同意例外情况下进行的急诊研究中,入组临床医生的作用。","authors":"Katherine Sahan, Ethan Cowan, Mark Sheehan","doi":"10.1007/s11017-025-09710-9","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The Exception from Informed Consent (EFIC) permits patient enrolment into therapeutic emergency research where obtaining informed consent is challenging. Yet this fails to resolve a core ethical conflict in the research and has generated controversy. This is because existing justification and practice has relied on applying EFIC per study-a wholesale permission to enroll irrespective of circumstance-instead of per patient. Our novel justification for enrolment centers on applying EFIC per patient, which empowers the enrolling clinician to judge whether to enroll patients with an Exception. This contrasts with the idea that clinician judgment is surplus to the judgements already made by institutions in deciding the research may proceed. Instead, we show that enrolling clinician's judgment is ethically significant and should not be overlooked: attending to this strengthens the research ethically and reduces controversy. There should be a bigger role for the clinician in the research enrolment space.</p>","PeriodicalId":94251,"journal":{"name":"Theoretical medicine and bioethics","volume":" ","pages":"231-246"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12037652/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The role of the enrolling clinician in emergency research conducted under an exception from informed consent.\",\"authors\":\"Katherine Sahan, Ethan Cowan, Mark Sheehan\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s11017-025-09710-9\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>The Exception from Informed Consent (EFIC) permits patient enrolment into therapeutic emergency research where obtaining informed consent is challenging. Yet this fails to resolve a core ethical conflict in the research and has generated controversy. This is because existing justification and practice has relied on applying EFIC per study-a wholesale permission to enroll irrespective of circumstance-instead of per patient. Our novel justification for enrolment centers on applying EFIC per patient, which empowers the enrolling clinician to judge whether to enroll patients with an Exception. This contrasts with the idea that clinician judgment is surplus to the judgements already made by institutions in deciding the research may proceed. Instead, we show that enrolling clinician's judgment is ethically significant and should not be overlooked: attending to this strengthens the research ethically and reduces controversy. There should be a bigger role for the clinician in the research enrolment space.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":94251,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Theoretical medicine and bioethics\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"231-246\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-06-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12037652/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Theoretical medicine and bioethics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11017-025-09710-9\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2025/4/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Theoretical medicine and bioethics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11017-025-09710-9","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/4/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

知情同意例外(EFIC)允许患者参与具有挑战性的获得知情同意的治疗性紧急研究。然而,这未能解决研究中的核心伦理冲突,并引发了争议。这是因为现有的理由和实践依赖于每项研究申请EFIC——无论情况如何都可以注册的批发许可——而不是每名患者。我们新颖的入组理由以每位患者应用EFIC为中心,这使入组的临床医生能够判断是否有例外情况的患者入组。这与临床医生的判断是多余的想法形成对比,在决定研究是否可以进行时,机构已经做出了判断。相反,我们表明,招收临床医生的判断在伦理上是重要的,不应该被忽视:关注这一点加强了研究的伦理和减少争议。临床医生应该在研究招生领域发挥更大的作用。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
The role of the enrolling clinician in emergency research conducted under an exception from informed consent.

The Exception from Informed Consent (EFIC) permits patient enrolment into therapeutic emergency research where obtaining informed consent is challenging. Yet this fails to resolve a core ethical conflict in the research and has generated controversy. This is because existing justification and practice has relied on applying EFIC per study-a wholesale permission to enroll irrespective of circumstance-instead of per patient. Our novel justification for enrolment centers on applying EFIC per patient, which empowers the enrolling clinician to judge whether to enroll patients with an Exception. This contrasts with the idea that clinician judgment is surplus to the judgements already made by institutions in deciding the research may proceed. Instead, we show that enrolling clinician's judgment is ethically significant and should not be overlooked: attending to this strengthens the research ethically and reduces controversy. There should be a bigger role for the clinician in the research enrolment space.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
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