1.  76
    Ethical Considerations in Determining Standard of Prevention Packages for HIV Prevention Trials: Examining PrEP.Bridget Haire, Morenike Oluwatoyin Folayan, Catherine Hankins, Jeremy Sugarman, Sheena McCormack, Gita Ramjee & Mitchell Warren - 2013 - Developing World Bioethics 13 (2):87-94.
    The successful demonstration that antiretroviral (ARV) drugs can be used in diverse ways to reduce HIV acquisition or transmission risks – either taken as pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) by those who are uninfected or as early treatment for prevention (T4P) by those living with HIV – expands the armamentarium of existing HIV prevention tools. These findings have implications for the design of future HIV prevention research trials. With the advent of multiple effective HIV prevention tools, discussions about the ethics and the (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
    Export citation  
    Bookmark   5 citations  
  2.  29
    Paper: The challenge of defining standards of prevention in HIV prevention trials.Sean Philpott, Lori Heise, Elizabeth McGrory, Lynn Paxton & Catherine Hankins - 2011 - Journal of Medical Ethics 37 (4):244-248.
    As new HIV prevention tools are developed, researchers face a number of ethical and logistic questions about how and when to include novel HIV prevention strategies and tools in the standard prevention package of ongoing and future HIV prevention trials. Current Joint United Nations Programme on HIV/AIDS /World Health Organization guidance recommends that participants in prevention trials receive ‘access to all state of the art HIV risk reduction methods’, and that decisions about adding new tools to the prevention package be (...)
    Direct download (6 more)  
    Export citation  
    Bookmark   4 citations  
  3.  47
    Veracity and rhetoric in paediatric medicine: a critique of Svoboda and Van Howe's response to the AAP policy on infant male circumcision.Brian Morris, Aaron Tobian, Catherine Hankins, Jeffrey Klausner & Joya Banerjee - 2014 - Journal of Medical Ethics 40 (7):463-470.
    In a recent issue of the Journal of Medical Ethics, Svoboda and Van Howe commented on the 2012 change in the American Academy of Pediatrics policy on newborn male circumcision, in which the AAP stated that benefits of the procedure outweigh the risks. Svoboda and Van Howe disagree with the AAP conclusions. We show here that their arguments against male circumcision are based on a poor understanding of epidemiology, erroneous interpretation of the evidence, selective citation of the literature, statistical manipulation (...)
    Direct download (6 more)  
    Export citation  
    Bookmark   2 citations