Article info
PDFBenefits to nonparticipants
Paper
Must research benefit human subjects if it is to be permissible?
- Correspondence to Dr Daniel Wikler, Mary B. Saltonstall Professor of Ethics and Population Health, Department of Global Health & Population 643c FXB, 651 Huntington Avenue, Boston, MA 02115, USA; wikler{at}hsph.harvard.edu
Citation
Must research benefit human subjects if it is to be permissible?
Publication history
- Received March 16, 2016
- Revised July 27, 2016
- Accepted August 7, 2016
- First published August 29, 2016.
Online issue publication
January 25, 2017
Article Versions
- Previous version (25 January 2017).
- You are viewing the most recent version of this article.
Request permissions
If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.
Copyright information
Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://www.bmj.com/company/products-services/rights-and-licensing/ This is an Open Access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited and the use is non-commercial. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/
Other content recommended for you
- The morality of risks in research: reflections on Kumar
- Exploring the ethics of tuberculosis human challenge models
- Limits to research risks
- The potential benefit of the placebo effect in sham-controlled trials: implications for risk-benefit assessments and informed consent
- Phase 1 oncology trials and informed consent
- Individual risk and community benefit in international research
- Refuting the net risks test: a response to Wendler and Miller’s “Assessing research risks systematically”
- Human infection challenge studies in endemic settings and/or low-income and middle-income countries: key points of ethical consensus and controversy
- Non-completion and informed consent
- Sham surgery controls: intracerebral grafting of fetal tissue for Parkinson’s disease and proposed criteria for use of sham surgery controls