Switch to: References

Add citations

You must login to add citations.
  1. Can unequal be more fair? A response to Andrew Avins.S. J. L. Edwards - 2000 - Journal of Medical Ethics 26 (3):179-182.
    In this paper, we respond to Andrew Avins's recent review of methods whose use he advocates in clinical trials, to make them more ethical. He recommends in particular, “unbalanced randomisation”. However, we argue that, before such a recommendation can be made, it is important to establish why unequal randomisation might offer ethical advantages over equal randomisation, other things being equal. It is important to make a pragmatic distinction between trials of treatments that are already routinely available and trials of restricted (...)
    Direct download (8 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  • Ethical Issues in Deep Brain Stimulation Research for Treatment-Resistant Depression: Focus on Risk and Consent.Laura B. Dunn, Paul E. Holtzheimer, Jinger G. Hoop, Helen S. Mayberg, Laura Weiss Roberts & Paul S. Appelbaum - 2011 - American Journal of Bioethics Neuroscience 2 (1):29-36.
    Deep brain stimulation (DBS) is currently in pivotal trials as an intervention for treatment-resistant depression (TRD). Although offering hope for TRD, DBS also provokes ethical concerns—particularly about decision-making capacity of people with depression—among bioethicists, investigators, institutional review boards, and the public. Here, we examine this critical issue of informed consent for DBS research using available evidence regarding decision-making capacity and depression. Further, we explore the implications of the nature of TRD as well as that of the intervention (invasive brain surgery) (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   15 citations