In medical research, the gathering and presenting of data can be limited in accordance with the futility judgments of the researchers. In that case, research results falling below the threshold of what the researchers deem beneficial would not to be reported in detail. As a result, the reported information would tend to be useful only to those who share the valuational assumptions of the researchers. Should this practice become entrenched, it would reduce public confidence in the medical establishment, aggravate factionalism within the research community, and unduly influence treatment decisions. I suggest alternative frameworks for measuring survival outcomes.
Statistics from Altmetric.com
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.
Other content recommended for you
- Biomedical conflicts of interest: a defence of the sequestration thesis—learning from the cases of Nancy Olivieri and David Healy
- Western Medical Research Conference 2017 (Formerly Western Regional Meeting) Camel, California, January 26–28, 2017
- WESTERN REGIONAL MEETING ABSTRACTS
- 2020 Western Medical Research Conference
- 2021 Southern Medical Research Conference
- Prognostication and shared decision making in neurocritical care
- Futility has no utility in resuscitation medicine
- 2022 Southern Medical Research Conference
- Selected Meeting Abstracts from 2015 3rd International Conference on Biomedicine and Pharmaceutics
- Western Medical Research conference (formerly Western Regional Meeting), January 25–27 2018, Carmel, California