Shaping medical students' attitudes toward ethically important aspects of clinical research: Results of a randomized, controlled educational intervention
Laura Weiss Roberts, Teddy D. Warner, Laura B. Dunn, Janet L. Brody, Katherine Green Hammond & Brian B. Roberts
Ethics and Behavior 17 (1):19 – 50 (2007)
AbstractThe effects of research ethics training on medical students' attitudes about clinical research are examined. A preliminary randomized controlled trial evaluated 2 didactic approaches to ethics training compared to a no-intervention control. The participant-oriented intervention emphasized subjective experiences of research participants (empathy focused). The criteria-oriented intervention emphasized specific ethical criteria for analyzing protocols (analytic focused). Compared to controls, those in the participant-oriented intervention group exhibited greater attunement to research participants' attitudes related to altruism, trust, quality of relationships with researchers, desire for information, hopes about participation and possible therapeutic misconception, importance of consent forms, and deciding quickly about participation. The participant-oriented group also agreed more strongly that seriously ill people are capable of making their own research participation decisions. The criteria-oriented intervention did not affect learners' attitudes about clinical research, ethical duties of investigators, or research participants' decision making. An empathy-focused approach affected medical students' attunement to research volunteer perspectives, preferences, and attributes, but an analytically oriented approach had no influence. These findings underscore the need to further examine the differential effects of empathy-versus analytic-focused approaches to the teaching of ethics.
Added to PP
Historical graph of downloads
References found in this work
No references found.
Citations of this work
A Meta-Analytic Comparison of Face-to-Face and Online Delivery in Ethics Instruction: The Case for a Hybrid Approach.E. Michelle Todd, Logan L. Watts, Tyler J. Mulhearn, Brett S. Torrence, Megan R. Turner, Shane Connelly & Michael D. Mumford - 2017 - Science and Engineering Ethics 23 (6):1719-1754.
Similar books and articles
Selecting Subjects for Participation in Clinical Research: An Empirical Inquiry and Ethical Analysis.Charles Weijer - unknown
Clinical Equipoise and the Incoherence of Research Ethics.Franklin G. Miller & Howard Brody - 2007 - Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 32 (2):151 – 165.
Evaluating the Therapeutic Misconception.Franklin G. Miller & Steven Joffe - 2006 - Kennedy Institute of Ethics Journal 16 (4):353-366.
Attitudes, Understanding, and Concerns Regarding Medical Research Amongst Egyptians: A Qualitative Pilot Study. [REVIEW]Susan S. Khalil, Henry J. Silverman, May Raafat, Samer El-Kamary & Maged El-Setouhy - 2007 - BMC Medical Ethics 8 (1):9.
Students as Research Participants or as Learners?Ling Shi - 2006 - Journal of Academic Ethics 4 (1-4):205-220.
The Oxford Textbook of Clinical Research Ethics.Ezekiel J. Emanuel (ed.) - 2008 - Oxford University Press.
Mentoring and the Impact of the Research Climate.Glyn C. Roberts, Maria Kavussanu & Robert L. Sprague - 2001 - Science and Engineering Ethics 7 (4):525-537.
Study of a Cognitive Dissonance Intervention to Address High School Students' Cheating Attitudes and Behaviors.Georgiana Shick Tryon & Edward J. Vinski - 2009 - Ethics and Behavior 19 (3):218-226.
Ethical and Regulatory Aspects of Clinical Research: Readings and Commentary.Ezekiel J. Emanuel (ed.) - 2003 - Johns Hopkins University Press.