Clinical research in context: Reexamining the distinction between research and practice

Journal of Medicine and Philosophy

Volumn 35, Issue 1, 2010, Pages 46-63

  Anderson, James A ^a  

^a Biomedical Ethics Unit   (Canada)

Author keywords

Epistemology; Ethics; Medicine; Practice; Research

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; ETHICS; EVIDENCE BASED MEDICINE; HUMAN; MASS COMMUNICATION; MEDICAL RESEARCH; MEDICINE; ORGANIZATION AND MANAGEMENT; PHILOSOPHY; RESEARCH SUBJECT;

BIOMEDICAL RESEARCH; DIFFUSION OF INNOVATION; EVIDENCE-BASED MEDICINE; HUMANS; MEDICINE; PHILOSOPHY, MEDICAL; RESEARCH SUBJECTS;

EID: 75649116048     PISSN: 03605310     EISSN: 17445019     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1093/jmp/jhp054     Document Type: Review

References (18)

1. Anderson, J. A. 2007. Clinical research in context: the ethics and epistemology of clinical science. PhD diss., Dalhousie University.
2. Ahrens, E. H. 1992. The crisis in clinical research: Overcoming institutional obstacles. New York : Oxford University Press.
3. Campbell, R. 1998. Illusions of paradox: A feminist epistemology naturalized. Lanham, MD : Rowman & Littlefield.
4. Comroe, J. H., and R. H. Dripps. 1976. Scientifi c basis for the support of biomedical science. Science 192 : 105-111
5. Djulbegovic, B. 2007. Articulating and responding to uncertainties in clinical research. Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 32 : 79-98
6. Feinstein, A. R. 1999. Basic biomedical science and the destruction of the pathophysiologic bridge from bench to bedside. American Journal of Medicine 107 : 461-467
7. Gifford, F. 1986. The conflict between randomized clinical trials and the therapeutic obligation. Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 11 : 347-366
8. Goldstein, J. L., and M. S. Brown. 1997. The clinical investigator: Bewitched, bothered, and bewildered - but still beloved. Journal of Clinical Investigation 99 : 2803-2812
9. Kimmelman, J. 2007. The therapeutic misconception at 25: Treatment, research, and confusion . Hastings Center Report 37 : 36-42.
10. Longino, H. 1990. Science as social knowledge: Values and objectivity in scientifi c inquiry. Princeton, NJ : Princeton University Press.
11. 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.
12. 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.
13. President's Biomedical Research Panel. 1976. Report of the President's Biomedical Research Panel, submitted to the President and the Congress of the United States. Washington : U.S. Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, Public Health Service.
14. Rees, J. 2004. The fundamentals of clinical discovery. Perspectives in Biology and Medicine 47 : 597-607.
15. Reichenbach, H. 1938. Experience and prediction: An analysis of the foundations and the structure of knowledge. Chicago, IL : University of Chicago Press.
16. Schechter, A. N. 1998. The crisis in clinical research: Endangering the half-century National Institutes of Health consensus. JAMA 280 : 1440-1442
17. Williams, M. 1996. Unnatural doubts: Epistemological realism and the basis of scepticism. Princeton, NJ : Princeton University Press.
18. 2001. Problems of knowledge: A critical introduction to epistemology. New York : Oxford University Press.