Risk and risk-benefit evaluations in biomedical research

Handbook of Risk Theory: Epistemology, Decision Theory, Ethics, and Social Implications of Risk

Volumn , Issue , 2012, Pages 179-211

  Rid, Annette ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF ZURICH   (Switzerland)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 84938331714     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Book    
DOI: 10.1007/978-94-007-1433-5_8     Document Type: Chapter

References (104)

1. Abramson NS, Meisel A, Safar P (1986) Deferred consent. A new approach for resuscitation research on comatose patients. JAMA 255:2466-2471
2. Ackerman TF (1980) Moral duties of parents and nontherapeutic clinical research procedures involving children. Bioethics Q 2:94-111
3. Ad hoc group for the development of implementing guidelines for Directive 2001/20/EC relating to good clinical practice in the conduct of clinical trials on medicinal products for human use (2008) European Union. Ethical considerations for clinical trials on medicinal products conducted with the paediatric population. Eur J Health Law 15:223-250
4. Annas G, Grodin M (1992) The Nazi doctors and the Nuremberg code. Oxford University Press, New York
5. AppelbaumPS, Roth LH, Lidz CW, Benson P, WinsladeW (1987) False hopes and best data: consent to research and the therapeutic misconception. Hastings Cent Rep 17:20-24
6. Beecher HK (1966) Ethics and clinical research. N Engl J Med 274:1354-1360
7. Brock DW (1994) Ethical issues in exposing children to risks in research. In: Grodin M, Glantz L (eds) Children as research subjects: science, ethics, and law. Oxford University Press, New York
8. Brock DW (2004) Ethical issues in the use of cost effectiveness analysis for the prioritisation of health care resources. In: Anand S, Peter F, Sen A (eds) Public health, ethics, and equity. Oxford University Press, New York, pp 201-223
9. Council for International Organizations of Medical Sciences (CIOMS) (2002) International ethical guidelines for biomedical research involving human subjects. CIOMS, Geneva
10. Council of Europe (2005) Additional protocol to the convention on human rights and biomedicine, concerning biomedical research. Council of Europe, Strasbourg, France
11. Council on Health Research for Development (COHRED) (2006) Priority setting for health research: toward a management process for low and middle income countries. COHRED, Geneva
12. Damore LJ 2nd, Rantis PC, Vernava AM 3rd, Longo WE (1996) Colonoscopic perforations. Etiology, diagnosis, and management. Dis Colon Rectum 39: 1308-1314
13. Department of Health and Human Services (1991) U.S. Code of Federal Regulations, Title 45, Part 46
14. Emanuel EJ, Miller FG (2007) Money and distorted ethical judgments about research: ethical assessment of the TeGenero TGN1412. Am J Bioeth 7:76-81
15. Emanuel EJ, Wendler D, Grady C (2000) What makes clinical research ethical? JAMA 283:2701-2711
16. European Commission, Health and Consumers Directorate-General (2011) Revision of the ‘Clinical Trials Directive’ 2001/20/EC. Concept paper submitted for public consultation
17. Fost N, Levine RJ (2007) The dysregulation of human subjects research. JAMA 298:2196-2198
18. Freedman B (1987a) Equipoise and the ethics of clinical research. N Engl J Med 317:141-145
19. Freedman B (1987b) Scientific value and validity as ethical requirements for research: a proposed explication. IRB 9:7-10
20. Freedman B, Fuks A, Weijer C (1992) Demarcating research and treatment: a systematic approach for the analysis of the ethics of clinical research. Clin Res 40:653-660
21. Freedman B, Fuks A, Weijer C (1993) In loco parentis. Minimal risk as an ethical threshold for research upon children. Hastings Cent Rep 23:13-19
22. Green LA, Lowery JC, Kowalski CP, Wyszewianski L (2006a) Impact of institutional review board practice variation on observational health services research. Health Serv Res 41:214-230
23. Green SK, Taub S, Morin K, Higginson D (2006b) Guidelines to prevent malevolent use of biomedical research. Camb Q Healthc Ethics 15:432-439 (discussion 439-447)
24. Gunsalus CK, Bruner EM, Burbules NC, Dash L, Finkin M, Goldberg JP, Greenough WT, Miller GA, Pratt MG (2006) Mission creep in the IRB world. Science 312:1441
25. Halpern SA (2004) Lesser harms. The morality of risk in medical research. University of Chicago Press, Chicago/
26. London Hausman DM (2007) Third-party risks in research: should IRBs address them? IRB 29:1-5
27. Hirshon JM, Krugman SD, Witting MD, Furuno JP, LimcangcoMR, PerisseAR, Rasch EK(2002) Variability in institutional review board assessment of minimal-risk research. Acad Emerg Med 9:1417-1420
28. Hollis A, Pogge T (2008) The health impact fund: making new medicines accessible to all. Incentives for Global Health. http://www.yale.edu/macmillan/igh/hif_ book.pdf
29. Institute of Medicine, Committee on the NIH Research Priority-Setting Process (1998) Scientific opportunities and public needs: improving priority setting and public input at the national institutes of health. National Academy Press, Washington, DC
30. Jansen LA (2009) The ethics of altruism in clinical research. Hastings Cent Rep 39:26-36
31. Joffe S, Miller FG (2008) Bench to bedside: mapping the moral terrain of clinical research. Hastings Cent Rep 38:30-42
32. Jonsen AR (1998) Experiments perilous: the ethics of research with human subjects. In: Jonsen AR. The birth of bioethics. Oxford University Press, New York/Oxford, pp 126-165
33. Kaplan W, Laing R (2004) Priority medicines for Europe and the world. World Health Organization, Geneva
34. Katzman GL, Dagher AP, Patronas NJ (1999) Incidental findings on brain magnetic resonance imaging from 1000 asymptomatic volunteers. JAMA 282:36-39
35. Kim S, Ubel P, De Vries R (2009) Pruning the regulatory tree. Nature 457:534-535
36. Kimmelman J (2005) Medical research, risk, and bystanders. IRB 27:1-6
37. King NM (2000) Defining and describing benefit appropriately in clinical trials. J Law Med Ethics 28:332-343
38. Kopelman LM (2004) Minimal risk as an international ethical standard in research. JMed Philos 29:351-378
39. Lenk C, Radenbach K, Dahl M, Wiesemann C (2004) Non-therapeutic research with minors: how do chairpersons of German research ethics committees decide? J Med Ethics 30:85-87
40. Levin B, Lieberman DA, McFarland B, Andrews KS, Brooks D, Bond J, Dash C, Giardiello FM, Glick S, Johnson D, Johnson CD, Levin TR, Pickhardt PJ, Rex DK, Smith RA, Thorson A, Winawer SJ (2008) Screening and surveillance for the early detection of colorectal cancer and adenomatous polyps, 2008: a joint guideline from the American Cancer Society, the US multi-society task force on colorectal cancer, and the American College of Radiology. Gastroenterology 134:1570-1595
41. Levine RJ (1986) Ethics and regulation of clinical research. Urban & Schwarzenberg, Baltimore
42. Levine RJ (1999) The need to revise the declaration of Helsinki. N Engl J Med 341:531-534
43. London AJ (2006) Reasonable risks in clinical research: a critique and a proposal for the integrative approach. Stat Med 25:2869-2885
44. London AJ (2007) Two dogmas of research ethics and the integrative approach to human-subjects research. J Med Philos 32:99-116
45. Macklin R (1989) The paradoxical case of payment as benefit to research subjects. IRB 11:1-3
46. Maio G (2002) Ethik der Forschung am Menschen. Fromann-Holzboog, Stuttgart-Bad Cannstadt
47. Manning DJ (2000) Presumed consent in emergency neonatal research. J Med Ethics 26:249-253
48. Mansbach J, Acholonu U, Clark S, Camargo CA Jr (2007) Variation in institutional review board responses to a standard, observational, pediatric research protocol. Acad Emerg Med 14:377-380
49. Martin DK, Meslin EM, Kohut N, Singer PA (1995) The incommensurability of research risks and benefits: practical help for research ethics committees. IRB 17:8-10
50. McCormick RA (1974) Proxy consent in the experimentation situation. Perspect Biol Med 18:2-20
51. McCormick RA (1976) Experimentation in children: sharing in sociality. Hastings Cent Rep 6:41-46
52. McIntosh N, Bates P, Brykczynska G, Dunstan G, Goldman A, Harvey D, Larcher V, McCrae D, McKinnon A, Patton M, Saunders J, Shelley P (2000) Guidelines for the ethical conduct of medical research involving children. Royal College of Paediatrics and Child health: Ethics Advisory Committee. Arch Dis Child 82:177-182
53. McWilliams R, Hoover-Fong J, Hamosh A, Beck S, Beaty T, Cutting G (2003) Problematic variation in local institutional review of a multicenter genetic epidemiology study. JAMA 290:360-366
54. Miller FG, Brody H (2003) A critique of clinical equipoise. Therapeutic misconception in the ethics of clinical trials. Hastings Cent Rep 33:19-28
55. Miller FG, Brody H (2007) Clinical equipoise and the incoherence of research ethics. J Med Philos 32:151-165
56. Miller FG, Joffe S (2008) Benefit in phase 1 oncology trials: therapeutic misconception or reasonable treatment option? Clin Trials 5:617-623
57. Miller FG, Joffe S (2009) Limits to research risks. J Med Ethics 35:445-449
58. Miller FG, Wertheimer A (2007) Facing up to paternalism in research ethics. Hastings Cent Rep 37:24-34
59. Miller PB, Weijer C (2006) Trust based obligations of the state and physician-researchers to patient-subjects. J Med Ethics 32:542-547
60. Mitscherlich A, Mielke F (1949) Doctors of infamy: the story of the Nazi medical crimes. Henry Schuman, New York
61. National Bioethics Advisory Commission (2001) Ethical and policy issues in research involving human participants. The Commission, Bethesda, MD
62. National Commission for the Protection of Human Subjects of Biomedical and Behavioral Research (1979) The Belmont Report. Ethical principles and guidelines for the protection of human subjects of research. U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, DC
63. Nelson RM, Ross LF (2005) In defense of a single standard of research risk for all children. J Pediatr 147:565-566
64. Nicholson RH, Institute ofMedical Ethics (Great Britain) (1986) Medical research with children: ethics, law, and practice: the report of an Institute of Medical Ethics working group on the ethics of clinical research investigations on children. Oxford University Press, Oxford, New York
65. Office for Human Research Protections (OHRP) (1998) Categories of research that that may be reviewed by the institutional review board (IRB) through an expedited review procedure
66. Office for Protection from Research Risks (OPRR) (1993) Informed consent: legally effective and prospectively obtained. Office of Protection from Research Risks
67. O’Herrin JK, Fost N, Kudsk KA (2004) Health insurance portability accountability act (HIPAA) regulations: effect on medical record research. Ann Surg 239: 772-776 (discussion 776-778)
68. Rajczi A (2004) Making risk-benefit assessments of medical research protocols. J Law Med Ethics 32:338-348, 192
69. Rawls J (1971) Theory of justice. Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA
70. Resnik DB (2005) Eliminating the daily life risks standard from the definition of minimal risk. J Med Ethics 31:35-38
71. Resnik DB, Sharp RR (2006) Protecting third parties in human subjects research. IRB 28:1-7
72. Rid A, Wendler D (2010) Risk-benefit assessment in medical research-critical review and open questions. Law, Probability Risk 9:151-177
73. Rid A, Wendler D (2011) A framework for risk-benefit evaluations in biomedical research. Kennedy Inst Ethics J 21:141-179
74. Rid A, Wendler D (forthcoming) A proposal and prototype for a research risk repository to improve the protection of research participants. Clin Trials
75. Rid A, Emanuel EJ, Wendler D(2010) Evaluating the risks of clinical research. JAMA 304:1472-1479
76. Ross LF (1998) Children, families, and health care decision making. Clarendon Press, Oxford, New York
77. Ross LF, Nelson RM (2006) Pediatric research and the federal minimal risk standard. JAMA 295:759 (author reply 759-760)
78. Sachs B (2010) The exceptional ethics of the investigatorsubject relationship. J Med Philos 35:64-80
79. Savulescu J (2002) Two deaths and two lessons: is it time to review the structure and function of research ethics committees? J Med Ethics 28:1-2
80. Savulescu J, Chalmers I, Blunt J (1996) Are research ethics committees behaving unethically? Some suggestions for improving performance and accountability. BMJ 313:1390-1393
81. Selgelid MJ (2007) A tale of two studies; ethics, bioterrorism, and the censorship of science. Hastings Cent Rep 37:35-43
82. Selgelid MJ (2009) Governance of dual-use research: an ethical dilemma. Bull World Health Organ 87:720-723
83. Shah S, Whittle A, Wilfond B, Gensler G, Wendler D (2004) How do institutional review boards apply the federal risk and benefit standards for pediatric research? JAMA 291:476-482
84. Slovic P (1987) Perception of risk. Science 236:280-285
85. Steinbrook R (2002) Protecting research subjects-the crisis at Johns Hopkins. N Engl J Med 346:716-720
86. Suntharalingam G, Perry MR, Ward S, Brett SJ, Castello-Cortes A, Brunner MD, Panoskaltsis N (2006) Cytokine storm in a phase 1 trial of the Anti CD28 monoclonal antibody TGN1412. N Engl J Med 355:1018-1028
87. The Academy of Medical Sciences (2011) A new pathway for the regulation and governance of health research. The Academy of Medical Sciences, London
88. Tversky A, Kahneman D (1974) Judgment under uncertainty: heuristics and biases. Science 185:1124-1131
89. Van Luijn HE, Musschenga AW, Keus RB, Robinson WM, Aaronson NK (2002) Assessment of the risk/benefit ratio of phase II cancer clinical trials by Institutional Review Board (IRB) members. Ann Oncol 13:1307-1313
90. van Luijn HE, Aaronson NK, Keus RB, Musschenga AW (2006) The evaluation of the risks and benefits of phase II cancer clinical trials by Institutional Review Board (IRB) members: a case study. J Med Ethics 32:170-176
91. van Teijlingen ER, Douglas F, Torrance N (2008) Clinical governance and research ethics as barriers to UK low-risk population-based health research? BMC Public Health 8:396
92. Weijer C (1999) Thinking clearly about research risk: implications of the work of Benjamin Freedman. IRB 21:1-5
93. Weijer C (2000) The ethical analysis of risk. J Law Med Ethics 28:344-361
94. Weijer C (2001) The ethical analysis of risks and potential benefits in human subjects research: history, theory, and implications for US regulation. In: National Bioethics Advisory Commission (eds) Report on ethical and policy issues in research involving human participants. Volume II-commissioned papers and staff analysis, Bethesda, MD, p P1-P29
95. Weijer C, Miller PB (2004) When are research risks reasonable in relation to anticipated benefits? Nat Med 10:570-573
96. Weijer C, Miller PB (2007) Refuting the net risks test: a response toWendler and Miller’s '‘Assessing research risks systematically’'. J Med Ethics 33:487-490
97. Weinstein N (1989) Optimistic biases about personal risks. Science 246:1232-1233
98. Wendler D (2005) Protecting subjects who cannot give consent: toward a better standard for '‘minimal’’ risks. Hastings Cent Rep 35:37-43
99. Wendler D (2010) The ethics of pediatric research. Oxford University Press, New York
100. Wendler D, Miller FG (2007) Assessing research risks systematically: the net risks test. J Med Ethics 33:481-486
101. Wertheimer A (2010) Rethinking the ethics of clinical research: widening the lens. Oxford University Press, New York
102. World Medical Association (WMA) (1964) Declaration of Helsinki. In: Schmidt U, Frewer A (eds) History and theory of human experimentation: the Declaration of Helsinki and modern medical ethics. Franz Steiner Verlag, Stuttgart, pp 339-340
103. World Medical Association (WMA) (2008) WMA Declaration of Helsinki-ethical principles for medical research involving human subjects (first version adopted 1964)
104. Yue NC, Longstreth WT Jr, Elster AD, Jungreis CA, O’Leary DH, Poirier VC (1997) Clinically serious abnormalities found incidentally at MR imaging of the brain: data from the cardiovascular health study. Radiology 202:41-46