Some Popular Versions of Uninformed Consent
- 1 January 2000
- journal article
- research article
- Published by Springer Nature in Health Care Analysis
- Vol. 8 (1) , 41-53
- https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1009421824028
Abstract
A patient's informed consent is required by the Nuremberg code, and its successors, before she can be entered into a clinical trial. However, concern has been expressed by both patients and professionals about the beneficial or detrimental effect on the patient of asking for her consent. We examine advantages and drawbacks of popular variations on consent, which might reduce the stress on patients at the point of illness. Both informed and uninformed responses to particular trials, and trials in general, are discussed. The selection by doctors of patients, to whom entry to trials will be offered, is explored. Alternative forms of consent require restrictions on patients' knowledge, personal responsibility and freedom of choice.Keywords
This publication has 17 references indexed in Scilit:
- Informed consent in human experimentation before the Nuremberg codeBMJ, 1996
- Clinical trials--a brave new partnership?Journal of Medical Ethics, 1994
- New approach for recruitment into randomised controlled trialsThe Lancet, 1993
- When to stop a clinical trial.BMJ, 1992
- Breast cancer trials: a patient's viewpointThe Lancet, 1992
- The marriage of clinical trials and clinical decision scienceStatistics in Medicine, 1990
- DO WE NEED INFORMED CONSENT?The Lancet, 1986
- Physicians’ Reasons for Not Entering Eligible Patients in a Randomized Clinical Trial of Surgery for Breast CancerNew England Journal of Medicine, 1984
- Scientific Inquiry and Authoritarianism in Perinatal Care and EducationBirth, 1983
- A New Design for Randomized Clinical TrialsNew England Journal of Medicine, 1979