Contextualizing clinical research: The epistemological role of clinical equipoise

Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics

Volumn 30, Issue 4, 2009, Pages 269-288

  Anderson, James A ^a  

^a MCGILL UNIVERSITY   (Canada)

Author keywords

Epistemology; Equipoise; Ethics; Medicine; Practice; Research

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; BIOETHICS; CLINICAL PRACTICE; CLINICAL RESEARCH; CONSENSUS; DOCTOR PATIENT RELATION; EPISTEMOLOGY; EVIDENCE BASED PRACTICE; GENERAL PRACTITIONER; METHODOLOGY; MORALITY; RESEARCH ETHICS;

BIOMEDICAL RESEARCH; CONFLICT OF INTEREST; ETHICS, MEDICAL; ETHICS, RESEARCH; EVIDENCE-BASED MEDICINE; HUMANS; INFORMED CONSENT; KNOWLEDGE; MORAL OBLIGATIONS; PHYSICIAN-PATIENT RELATIONS; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIALS AS TOPIC; RESEARCHER-SUBJECT RELATIONS; SOCIAL VALUES; WORLD HEALTH;

EID: 69949175616     PISSN: 13867415     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s11017-009-9104-6     Document Type: Article

References (27)

1. Freedman, Benjamin. 1987. Equipoise and the ethics of clinical research. The New England Journal of Medicine 317 (3): 141-145.
2. Temple, Robert, and Susan S. Ellenberg. 2000. Placebo-controlled trials and active-control trials in the evaluation of new treatments, part I: Ethical and scientific issues. Annals of Internal Medicine 133 (6): 263-455.
3. The National Commission for the Protection of Human Subjects of Biomedical and Behavioral Research. 1978. The Belmont Report. Bethesda, MD: US Department of Health, Education, and Welfare.
4. Joffe, Steven, and Franklin G. Miller. 2008. Bench to bedside: Mapping the moral terrain of clinical research. The Hastings Center Report 38 (2): 30-42.
5. Miller, Franklin G., and Howard Brody. 2003. A critique of clinical equipoise: Therapeutic misconception in the ethics of clinical trials. The Hastings Center Report 33 (3): 19-28.
6. Anderson, James A. 2007. Clinical research in context: The ethics and epistemology of clinical science. PhD diss., Dalhousie University.
7. Bernard, Claude. 1927. An introduction to the study of experimental medicine. New York: MacMillan.
8. Giere, Ronald N. 1997. Understanding scientific reasoning, 4th ed. Harcourt, Brace, Jovanovich: Fort Worth.
9. Jansen, Lynn A. 2008. Doctor vs. scientist? The Hastings Center Report 38 (2): 3.
10. Reichenbach, Hans. 1938. Experience and prediction: An analysis of the foundations and the structure of knowledge. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
11. Longino, Helen. 1990. Science as social knowledge: Values and objectivity in scientific inquiry. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
12. Campbell, Richmond. 1998. Illusions of paradox: A feminist epistemology naturalized. Lanham, MD: Rowman and Littlefield.
13. Williams, Michael. 1996. Unnatural doubts: Epistemological realism and the basis of scepticism. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
14. Rorty, Richard. 1988. Is natural science a natural kind? Construction and constraint. Notre Dame, Indiana: University of Notre Dame Press.
15. Williams, Michael. 2001. Problems of knowledge: A critical introduction to epistemology. New York: Oxford University Press.
16. Williams, Michael. 2007. Why (Wittgensteinian) contextualism is not relativism. Episteme: A Journal of Social Epistemology 4 (1): 93-114.
17. Ahrens, Edward H. 1992. The crisis in clinical research: Overcoming institutional obstacles. New York: Oxford University Press.
18. NIH Director's Panel on Clinical Research. 1997. Executive summary: NIH director's panel on clinical research. Bethesda, MD: US Department of Health and Human Services.
19. Goldstein, Joseph L., and Michael S. Brown. 1997. The clinical investigator: Bewitched, bothered, and bewildered - But still beloved. Journal of Clinical Investigation 99 (12): 2803-2812.
20. Schechter, Alan N. 1998. The crisis in clinical research: Endangering the half-century National Institutes of Health consensus. JAMA 280 (16): 1440-1442.
21. Rees, Jonathan. 2004. The fundamentals of clinical discovery. Perspectives in Biology and Medicine 47 (4): 597-607.
22. Hellman, Deborah. 2002. Evidence, belief, and action: The failure of equipoise to resolve the ethical tension in the randomized clinical trial. Journal of Law, Medicine and Ethics 30: 375-380.
23. Evans, Emily L., and Alex J. London. 2006. Equipoise and the criteria for reasonable action. Journal of Law, Medicine and Ethics 34 (2): 441-450.
24. Searle, John. 1969. Speech acts: An essay in the philosophy of language. London: Cambridge University Press.
25. Rawls, John. 1955. Two Concepts of Rules. The Philosophical Review 64 (1): 3-32.
26. Wittgenstein, Ludwig. 1969. On certainty. Ed. G.E.M. Anscombe and G.H. von Wright (trans: Paul, Denis and Anscombe, G.E.M.). New York: Harper.
27. Miller, Paul, and Charles Weijer. 2003. Rehabilitating equipoise. Kennedy Institute of Ethics Journal 13 (2): 93-118.