Eliminating the daily life risks standard from the definition of minimal risk
Open Access
- 5 January 2005
- journal article
- review article
- Published by BMJ in Journal of Medical Ethics
- Vol. 31 (1) , 35-38
- https://doi.org/10.1136/jme.2004.010470
Abstract
The phrase “minimal risk,” as defined in the United States’ federal research regulations, is ambiguous and poorly defined. This article argues that most of the ambiguity that one finds in the phrase stems from the “daily life risks” standard in the definition of minimal risk. In this article, the author argues that the daily life risks standard should be dropped and that “minimal risk” should be defined as simply “the probability and magnitude of the harm or discomfort anticipated in research are not greater than those encountered during the performance of routine physical or psychological examinations or tests”.Keywords
This publication has 12 references indexed in Scilit:
- How Do Institutional Review Boards Apply the Federal Risk and Benefit Standards for Pediatric Research?JAMA, 2004
- Exploitation in Biomedical ResearchTheoretical Medicine and Bioethics, 2003
- Moral Problems in Assessing Research RiskIRB: Ethics & Human Research, 2000
- What Makes Clinical Research Ethical?JAMA, 2000
- The Ethical Analysis of RiskJournal of Law, Medicine & Ethics, 2000
- Children as Research Subjects: A DilemmaJournal of Medicine and Philosophy, 2000
- Thinking clearly about research risk: implications of the work of Benjamin Freedman.IRB: Ethics & Human Research, 1999
- In Loco Parentis Minimal Risk as an Ethical Threshold for Research upon ChildrenHastings Center Report, 1993
- Assessment of risk in research on childrenThe Journal of Pediatrics, 1981
- Estimating risk in human research.1981