Some early phase clinical studies of candidate HIV cure and remission interventions appear to have adverse medical risk–benefit ratios for participants. Why, then, do people participate? And is it ethically permissible to allow them to participate? Recent work in decision theory sheds light on both of these questions, by casting doubt on the idea that rational individuals prefer choices that maximise expected utility, and therefore by casting doubt on the idea that researchers have an ethical obligation not to enrol participants in studies with high risk–benefit ratios. This work supports the view that researchers should instead defer to the considered preferences of the participants themselves. This essay briefly explains this recent work, and then explores its application to these two questions in more detail.
- Research Ethics
- HIV Infection and AIDS
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.
Read the full text or download the PDF:
Other content recommended for you
- Patients, doctors and risk attitudes
- The potential use of decision analysis to support shared decision making in the face of uncertainty: the example of atrial fibrillation and warfarin anticoagulation
- Quality-adjusted life years
- Developing a dementia-specific preference-based quality of life measure (AD-5D) in Australia: a valuation study protocol
- Choosing the surgical mortality threshold for high risk patients with stage Ia non-small cell lung cancer: insights from decision analysis
- Eliciting patient preferences, priorities and trade-offs for outcomes following kidney transplantation: a pilot best–worst scaling survey
- Measuring the benefits of growth hormone therapy in children: a role for preference-based approaches?
- Developing a cerebral palsy-specific preference-based measure for a six-dimensional classification system (CP-6D): protocol for a valuation study
- Utility values associated with blindness in an adult population
- The morality of risks in research: reflections on Kumar