Competing commitments in clinical trials

IRB Ethics and Human Research

Volumn 31, Issue 5, 2009, Pages 1-6

  Lidz, Charles W ^a   Appelbaum, Paul S ^b   Joffe, Steven ^c   Albert, Karen ^a   Rosenbaum, Jill ^d   Simon, Lorna ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF MASSACHUSETTS MEDICAL SCHOOL   (United States)

^b College of Physicians and Surgeons ^*  (United States)

^c DANA FARBER CANCER INSTITUTE   (United States)

^d UNIVERSITY OF ALABAMA   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ARTICLE; CLINICAL PRACTICE; CLINICAL TRIAL (TOPIC); CONFLICT OF INTEREST; ETHICS; FEMALE; HUMAN; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; PERSONNEL; PROFESSIONAL STANDARD; RESEARCH ETHICS; UNITED STATES;

ADULT; CLINICAL TRIALS AS TOPIC; CONFLICT OF INTEREST; ETHICS COMMITTEES, RESEARCH; ETHICS, RESEARCH; FEMALE; HUMANS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; PHYSICIAN'S PRACTICE PATTERNS; RESEARCH PERSONNEL; UNITED STATES;

EID: 70350316537     PISSN: 01937758     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Article

References (18)

1. Miller FG, Rosenstein DL. The therapeutic orientation to clinical trials. NEJM 2003; 384 (14) : 1383-1386.
2. Marquis D. Leaving therapy to chance. Hastings Center Report 1983; 13 (4) : 40-47;
3. Helman S, Helman D. Of mice and men: Problems of the randomized clinical trial. NEJM 1991; 324: 1585-1589.
4. Gifford F. Community equipoise and the ethics of randomized clinical trials. Bioethics 1995; 59 (2) : 127-148.
5. Fisher B, Constantino J, Redmond CK, et al. Fraud in breast-cancer trials. NEJM 1994; 330 (20) : 1458-1462.
6. Oberle K, Allen M. Ethical considerations for nurses in clinical trials. Nursing Ethics 2006; 13 (2) : 18o-186.
7. LaFollette M. Research misconduct. Society 1994; 31: 6-10;
8. Rankin M, Esteves M. Perceptions of scientific misconduct in nursing. Nursing Research 1997; 46: 270-276;
9. Polk HC, Bowden TA, Rikkers LF, et al. Scientific data from clinical trials: Investigators' responsibilities and rights. Archive of Surgery 2002; 137: 639-640;
10. Healy D, Cattell D. Interface between authorship, industry and science in the domain of therapeutics. British Journal of Psychiatry 2003; 183: 22-77;
11. Lagnado M. Increasing the trust in scientific authorship. British Journal of Psychiatry 2003; 183: 3-4.
12. Antman K, Amato D, Wood W, et al. Selection bias in clinical trials. Journal of Clinical Oncology 1985; 3: 1142-1147;
13. Lee JY, Marks JE, Simpson JR. Recruitment of patients to cooperative group clinical trials. Cancer Clinical Trials 1980; 3: 381;
14. Taylor K, Feldstein M, Skeel R, et al. Fundamental dilemmas of the randomized clinical trial process: Results of a survey of the 1, 737 Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group investigators. Journal of Clinical Oncology 1994; 12: 1796-1805.
15. Winn RJ, Miransky J, Kerner JF, et al. An evaluation of physician determinants in the referral of patients for cancer clinical trials in the community setting. Progress in Clinical and Biological Research 1984; 156: 63-73.
16. Dillman DA, Mail and Internet Surveys: The Tailored Design Method 2nd ed. New York: Wiley, 2000.
17. Peto R, Baigent C. Trials: The next 50 years. Large scale randomized evidence of moderate benefits. British Medical Journal 1998; 317: 1170-1171;
18. Peto R, Collins R, Gray R. Large-scale randomized evidence: Large, simple trials and overviews of trials. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology 1995; 48 (1) : 23-40.