On what we will lose in giving up on clinical equipoise: A reply to Miller

Clinical Trials

Volumn 9, Issue 5, 2012, Pages 628-629

  Van Der Graaf, Rieke ^a   Van Delden, Johannes J M ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER UTRECHT   (Netherlands)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

BIOPSY; CLINICAL PRACTICE; EQUIPOISE; HEALTH CARE POLICY; HUMAN; NOTE; PATIENT CARE; PRINCIPAL COMPONENT ANALYSIS; PRIORITY JOURNAL; QUALITY CONTROL; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL (TOPIC); RISK; RISK BENEFIT ANALYSIS; STUDY DESIGN;

HUMANS; NONTHERAPEUTIC HUMAN EXPERIMENTATION; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIALS AS TOPIC; THERAPEUTIC EQUIPOISE;

EID: 84867559303     PISSN: 17407745     EISSN: 17407753     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/1740774512453221     Document Type: Note

References (8)

1. Freedman B. Equipoise and the ethics of clinical research. N Engl J Med. 1987 ; 317 (3). 141-5
2. Miller FG, Brody H. A critique of clinical equipoise: Therapeutic misconception in the ethics of clinical trials. Hastings Cent Rep. 2003 ; 33: 19-28
3. Miller FG, Joffe S. Equipoise and the dilemma of randomized clinical trials. N Engl J Med. 2011 ; 364: 476-80
4. Miller FG. Clinical equipoise and risk-benefit assessment. Clin Trials. 2012 ;:
5. Weijer C, Miller PB. When are research risks reasonable in relation to anticipated benefits. Nat Med. 2004 ; 10 (6). 570-3
6. Van der Graaf R, Van Delden JJM. Equipoise should be amended, not abandoned. Clin Trials. 2011 ; 8: 408-16
7. Richardson HS. Specifying, balancing and interpreting bioethical principles. J Med Philos. 2000 ; 25: 285-307
8. Beauchamp TL, Childress JL Principles of Biomedical Ethics. Oxford and New York: Oxford University Press ; 2009: