{"title":"恢复知情同意:在临床试验中使用风险感知。","authors":"Dana Ziker","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The current doctrine of informed consent falls far short of its potential to serve as a valuable safeguard for human research subjects. Instead of providing a channel of communication between physician and subject, informed consent is a lifeless entity responsible for a large portion of the misunderstanding existing between these parties. Acknowledging risk perception principles may help transform the informed consent process into an effective communication of health risks.</p>","PeriodicalId":87176,"journal":{"name":"Duke law and technology review","volume":" ","pages":"E1"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2003-06-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Reviving informed consent: using risk perception in clinical trials.\",\"authors\":\"Dana Ziker\",\"doi\":\"\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>The current doctrine of informed consent falls far short of its potential to serve as a valuable safeguard for human research subjects. Instead of providing a channel of communication between physician and subject, informed consent is a lifeless entity responsible for a large portion of the misunderstanding existing between these parties. Acknowledging risk perception principles may help transform the informed consent process into an effective communication of health risks.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":87176,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Duke law and technology review\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"E1\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2003-06-09\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Duke law and technology review\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Duke law and technology review","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
Reviving informed consent: using risk perception in clinical trials.
The current doctrine of informed consent falls far short of its potential to serve as a valuable safeguard for human research subjects. Instead of providing a channel of communication between physician and subject, informed consent is a lifeless entity responsible for a large portion of the misunderstanding existing between these parties. Acknowledging risk perception principles may help transform the informed consent process into an effective communication of health risks.