恢复知情同意:在临床试验中使用风险感知。

Duke law and technology review Pub Date : 2003-06-09
Dana Ziker
{"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}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目前的知情同意原则远远没有发挥其作为人类研究对象的宝贵保障的潜力。知情同意并没有提供医生和受试者之间的沟通渠道,而是一个死气沉沉的实体,造成了双方之间存在的很大一部分误解。承认风险认知原则可能有助于将知情同意过程转变为健康风险的有效沟通。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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.

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