Giving medicine a fair trial
- 24 June 2000
- Vol. 320 (7251) , 1686
- https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.320.7251.1686
Abstract
Evidence based medicine requires clinical trials, but these are often hampered by a misunderstanding of the relation between controlled experiment and “routine” health care. The debate in research ethics should now focus on the usability of clinical trial evidence and the fairness of the design and timing of trials. What do patients want from doctors in the way of treatment? Only what is best for them as individuals. Doctors want and intend the same for their patients. Sometimes there is uncertainty about which treatment is best. Which to choose? And how? Suppose we are considering not one patient but many. Does this make any difference? Considering large groups of patients, uncertainty comprises both uncertainty about what to do for each individual and uncertainty about the intrinsic merits of the treatments themselves. Uncertainty about the treatments themselves is now generally agreed to be a solid reason to perform a clinical trial. Arguably such a trial is morally necessary. If one of the treatments is actually better, in terms of …Keywords
This publication has 5 references indexed in Scilit:
- The “inclusion benefit” in clinical trialsThe Journal of Pediatrics, 1999
- Informed consent for clinical trials: in search of the “best” methodSocial Science & Medicine, 1998
- Trials: the next 50 yearsBMJ, 1998
- What do I want from health research and researchers when I am a patient?BMJ, 1995
- Equipoise and the Ethics of Clinical ResearchNew England Journal of Medicine, 1987