Is medical ethics doing its job?

Journal of Internal Medicine

Volumn 269, Issue 4, 2011, Pages 366-369

  Hansson, M G ^a   Chadwick, R ^b,c  

^a UPPSALA UNIVERSITY   (Sweden)

^b CARDIFF UNIVERSITY   (United Kingdom)

^c LANCASTER UNIVERSITY   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Medical ethics; Research ethics

Indexed keywords

EDITORIAL; HUMAN; IDEOLOGY; MEDICAL DECISION MAKING; MEDICAL ETHICS; MEDICAL PRACTICE; MEDICAL RESEARCH; PATIENT AUTONOMY; PATIENT RIGHT; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RESEARCH ETHICS;

BIOETHICAL ISSUES; COSTS AND COST ANALYSIS; ETHICAL REVIEW; ETHICS, MEDICAL; ETHICS, RESEARCH; HUMANS;

EID: 79952631742     PISSN: 09546820     EISSN: 13652796     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2796.2011.02348.x     Document Type: Editorial

References (27)

1. Regulation (EC) No 1901/2006 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 12 December 2006 on medicinal products for paediatric use.
2. Merton V. Ethical obstacles to the participation of women in biomedical research. In: Wolf S, ed. Feminism and Bioethics: Beyond reproduction. New York: Oxford University Press, 1996; 216-51.
3. Rogers WA. Evidence based medicine and justice: a framework for looking at the impact of EBM upon vulnerable or disadvantaged groups. J Med Ethics 2004; 30: 141-5.
4. Drapkin Lyerly A, Olivia Little M, Faden R. The second wave: toward responsible inclusion of pregnant women in research. Int J Fem Approaches Bioeth 2008; 1: 5-22.
5. Rogers W. Evidence-based medicine and women: do the principles and practice of EBM further women's health? Bioethics 2004; b18: 50-71.
6. Hansson MG. Do we need a wider view of autonomy in epidemiological research? Br Med J 2010; c2335: 1172-4.
7. Chadwick R, Berg K. Solidarity and equity: new ethical frameworks for genetic databases'. Nat Rev Gen 2001; 2: 318-21.
8. Hansson MG, Dillner J, Bartram CR, Carlsson J, Helgesson G. Should donors be allowed to give broad consent to future biobank research? Lancet Oncol 2006; 7: 266-9.
9. Hansson MG. Ethics and biobanks. Br J Cancer 2009; 100: 8-12.
10. Lunshof J, Chadwick R, Vorhaus D, Church G. From genetic privacy to open consent. Nat Rev Gen 2008; 9: 406-11.
11. Knoppers B, Chadwick R. Human genetic research: emerging trends in ethics. Nat Rev Gen 2005; 6: 75-9.
12. Frank S, Kieburtz K, Holloway R, Kim SYH. What is the risk of sham surgey in Parkinson disease clinical trials? A review of published reports. Neurology 2005; 65: 1101-3.
13. Landau W. Correspondence: what is the risk of sham surgery in Parkinson disease clinical trials? A review of published reports. Neurology 2006; 66: 1788.
14. Stefansson OA, Jonasson JG, Johannsson OT et al. Genomic profiling of breast tumours in relation to BRCA abnormalities and phenotypes. Breast Cancer Res 2009;11:R47. doi.
15. Limdi NA, Wadelius M, Cavallari L et al. Warfarin pharmacogenetics: a single VKROCI polymorphism is predictive of dose across 3 racial groups. Blood 2010; 115: 3827-34.
16. Duster T. Medicalisation of race. Lancet 2007; 369: 702-4.
17. Holm S. Pharmacogenetics, race and global injustice. Dev World Bioeth 2008; 8: 82-8.
18. Tutton T, Smart A, Martin P, Ashcroft R, Ellison GTH. Genotyping the future: scientists' expectations of race/ethnicity and genetics after BiDil®. J Law Med Ethics 2008; 36: 464-70.
19. Hansson MG. Taking the patient's side: the ethics of pharmacogenetics. Per Med 2010; 7: 75-85.
20. Haker H. Interests, rights, and the standards of care in the context of globalized medicine, Viewpoint. J Intern Med 2011; 269: 370-4.
21. Sutrop M. How to avoid a dichotomy between 'autonomy' and 'beneficence'? From liberalism to communitarianism and beyond, Viewpoint. J Intern Med 2011; 269: 375-9.
22. Campbell AV. Commentary: autonomy revisited, Commentary. J Intern Med 2011; 269: 380-2.
23. Beauchamp TL. Why our conceptions of research and practice may not serve the best interest of patients and subjects, Viewpoint. J Intern Med 2011; 269: 383-7.
24. Verweij M. The distinction between research and practice and the limited role of informed consent, Commentary. J Intern Med 2011; 269: 388-91.
25. Chalmers D. Are research ethics committees working in the best interests of participants in an increasingly globalised research environment? Viewpoint. J Intern Med 2011; 269: 392-5.
26. Whitney SN, Schneider CE. A method to estimate the cost in lives of Ethics Board review of biomedical research, Viewpoint. J Intern Med 2011; 269: 396-401.
27. Holm S. Systems, rules and the costs of being ethical, Commentary. J Intern Med 2011; 269: 402-5.