Article Text
Abstract
Clinical emergencies necessitate immediate action to avert the danger to the patient's life or health. Emergency patients might be in greatest need of novel therapies, and even presumed willing to assume some risk, but research into emergency conditions should be conducted under commonly accepted principles that fulfil the scientific, ethical, and legal criteria. Such criteria already exist in the US, but are still under development in Europe.
This article introduces criteria upon which trials in emergency settings may be ethically and legally justified in Europe. Based on both legal texts and professional guidelines, the author has established seven conditions for emergency research, of which informed consent and its substitutes, as well as the conditions of direct benefit requirement and necessity, are considered most problematic and therefore analysed more closely. Other conditions include absence of alternative methods, scientific validity, and approval by an ethics committee.
- Clinical trials
- emergency
- research ethics
- informed consent
Statistics from Altmetric.com
Footnotes
Read the full text or download the PDF:
Other content recommended for you
- The cultural specifity of research ethics—or why ethical debate in France is different
- Overview of European legislation on informed consent for neonatal research
- Non-therapeutic research with minors: how do chairpersons of German research ethics committees decide?
- Ethical considerations in accident and emergency research
- Are therapeutic motivation and having one's own doctor as researcher sources of therapeutic misconception?
- The problem of informed consent in emergency medicine research
- Is best interests a relevant decision making standard for enrolling non-capacitated subjects into clinical research?
- Parental opinion of consent in neonatal research
- Ethical concerns regarding guidelines for the conduct of clinical research on children
- Informed consent for functional MRI research on comatose patients following severe brain injury: balancing the social benefits of research against patient autonomy