The Belmont Report and Innovative Practice

Perspectives in Biology and Medicine 63 (2):313-326 (2020)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

One of the Belmont Report’s most important contributions was the clear and serviceable distinction it drew between standard medical practice and biomedical research. A less well-known achievement of the Report was its conceptualization of innovative practice, a type of medical practice that is often mistaken for research because it is new, untested, or experimental. Although the discussion of innovative practice in Belmont is brief and somewhat cryptic, this does not reflect the significant progress its authors made in understanding innovative practice and the distinctive ethical issues it raises. This article explores the history and broader context of Belmont’s conception of innovative practice, its strengths and weaknesses, and its contemporary relevance for scholars working in bioethics and health policy. While this conception of innovative practice deserves our attention, it is inherently limited in some important ways.

Similar books and articles

The Belmont Report and Innovative Clinical Research.John D. Lantos - 2020 - Perspectives in Biology and Medicine 63 (2):389-400.
Rethinking the Belmont Report?Phoebe Friesen, Lisa Kearns, Barbara Redman & Arthur L. Caplan - 2017 - American Journal of Bioethics 17 (7):15-21.
The Ethics of Information-Gathering in Innovative Practice.Jake Earl & David Wendler - 2020 - Internal Medicine Journal 50 (12):1583-1587.
Introduction to the Special Issue on the Belmont Report.Franklin G. Miller & Jonathan Kimmelman - 2020 - Perspectives in Biology and Medicine 63 (2):219-219.

Analytics

Added to PP
2020-08-07

Downloads
293 (#73,951)

6 months
80 (#74,185)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Jake Earl
Walter Reed Army Institute of Research

Citations of this work

No citations found.

Add more citations

References found in this work

No references found.

Add more references