Article Text
Response
Using a biomarker acutely to identify babies at risk of serious adverse effects from antibiotics: where is the ‘Terrible Moral and Medical Dilemma’?
Abstract
We thank Parker and Wright for engaging in this roundtable debate in such a spirited way. The ‘Pharmacogenetic [test] to Avoid Loss of Hearing’ (PALOH) Trial is the first time a genetic point of care test has been applied in the acute neonatal setting; therefore, it is not surprising that questions have been raised which require debate, discussion and clarification. Parker and Wright misattribute several assumptions to the roundtable authors, which we would like to clarify here. Since they raise wider questions about the PALOH trial itself, several of the roundtable discussants have made a joint response.
- minors/parental consent
- genethics
- research ethics
- human tissue
- genetic information
Statistics from Altmetric.com
Linked Articles
Read the full text or download the PDF:
Other content recommended for you
- Pharmacogenetics to Avoid Loss of Hearing (PALOH) trial: a protocol for a prospective observational implementation trial
- Terrible choices in the septic child: a response to the PALOH trial round table authors
- Using biomarkers in acute medicine to prevent hearing loss: should this require specific consent?
- Genetic testing in the acute setting: a round table discussion
- Genetic testing in the acute setting: a round table discussion
- Obtaining informed consent for genomics research in Africa: analysis of H3Africa consent documents
- Beyond regulatory approaches to ethics: making space for ethical preparedness in healthcare research
- The biobank consent debate: Why ‘meta-consent’ is not the solution?
- Sustainability and impact of the implementation of a frailty checklist for the acute medical unit: experience from a tertiary public hospital in Singapore
- Broadening consent—and diluting ethics?