Article info
PDFResearch ethics
“Fair’s fair argument” and voluntarism in clinical research: But, is it fair?
- Correspondence to: Dr Maria Antonietta Perna Public Health Policy Unit, School of Public Policy, University College London, Research & Development Directorate – NHS Foundation Trust UCLH, 17 Westall Close, West Street, Herts, Hertford SG13 8EY, UK; m.perna{at}ucl.ac.uk
Citation
“Fair’s fair argument” and voluntarism in clinical research: But, is it fair?
Publication history
- Received July 28, 2005
- Accepted September 25, 2005
- Revised September 16, 2005
- First published July 28, 2006.
Online issue publication
April 27, 2016
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
Copyright 2006 by the Journal of Medical Ethics
Other content recommended for you
- Should patients be allowed to veto their participation in clinical research?
- Informed consent for functional MRI research on comatose patients following severe brain injury: balancing the social benefits of research against patient autonomy
- High hospital research participation and improved colorectal cancer survival outcomes: a population-based study
- Participants’ responsibilities in clinical research
- Significance and structure of clinical research in the UK: an introduction for gastroenterology and hepatology nurses
- Influence of the law on risk and informed consent
- Streamlining the Clinical Research Enterprise
- Professional-patient relationships and informed consent
- What makes clinical labour different? The case of human guinea pigging
- Trust based obligations of the state and physician-researchers to patient-subjects