The question “When are research risks reasonable in relation to anticipated benefits?” is at the heart of disputes in the ethics of clinical research. Institutional review boards are often criticized for inconsistent decision-making, a problem that is compounded by a number of contemporary controversies, including the ethics of research involving placebo controls, developing countries, incapable adults and emergency rooms. If this pressing ethical question is to be addressed in a principled way, then a systematic approach to the ethics of risk in research is required. Component analysis provides such a systematic approach.
This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution
Relevant articles
Open Access articles citing this article.
-
Risk and benefit for umbrella trials in oncology: a systematic review and meta-analysis
BMC Medicine Open Access 08 July 2022
-
Ethical and practical considerations for cell and gene therapy toward an HIV cure: findings from a qualitative in-depth interview study in the United States
BMC Medical Ethics Open Access 09 April 2022
-
Pragmatic trials can address diagnostic controversies: recent lessons from gestational diabetes
Trials Open Access 01 April 2022
Access options
Subscribe to this journal
Receive 12 print issues and online access
$209.00 per year
only $17.42 per issue
Rent or buy this article
Prices vary by article type
from$1.95
to$39.95
Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout
References
Shah, S., Whittle, A., Wilfond, B., Gensler, G. & Wendler, D. J. Am. Med. Assoc. 291, 476–482 (2004).
Emanuel, E.J. & Miller, F.G. N. Engl. J. Med. 345, 915–919 (2001).
Angell, M. N. Engl. J. Med. 337, 847–849 (1997).
Karlawish, J.H. N. Engl. J. Med. 348, 1389–1392 (2003).
Valenzuela, T.D. & Copass, M.K. N. Engl. J. Med. 345, 689–690 (2001).
Weijer, C. J. Law Med. Ethics 28, 344–361 (2000).
National Commission for the Protection of Human Subjects of Biomedical and Behavioral Research. Institutional Review Boards: Report and Recommendations (DHEW Publication (OS) 78-0008, Washington, D.C., 1978).
National Commission for the Protection of Human Subjects of Biomedical and Behavioral Research. The Belmont Report: Ethical Principles and Guidelines for the Protection of Human Subjects of Research (DHEW Publication (OS) 78-0012, Washington, D.C., 1978).
U.S. National Bioethics Advisory Commission (NBAC). Ethical and Policy Issues in Research Involving Human Participants 69–95 (NBAC, Bethesda, Maryland, USA, 2000).
Emanuel, E.J., Wendler, D. & Grady, C. J. Am. Med. Assoc. 283, 2701–2711 (2000).
Miller, F.G. & Brody, H. Hastings Cent. Rep. 33, 19–28 (2003).
U.S. National Bioethics Advisory Commission (NBAC). Ethical and Policy Issues in Research Involving Human Participants 13 (NBAC, Bethesda, Maryland, USA, 2000).
Freedman, B. N. Engl. J. Med. 317, 141–145 (1987).
Freedman, B. IRB 9, 7–10 (1987).
Freedman, B., Fuks, A. & Weijer, C. Hastings Cent. Rep. 23, 13–19 (1993).
Kopelman, L.M. J. Med. Philos. 25, 745–764 (2000).
Miller, P.B. & Weijer, C. IRB 22, 6–10 (2000).
Freedman, B. IRB 12, 31–34 (1990).
Weijer, C. & Glass, K.C. N. Engl. J. Med. 346, 382–383 (2002).
Weijer, C. J. Law Med. Ethics 30, 69–72 (2002).
Connor, E.M. et al. N. Engl. J. Med. 331, 1173–1180 (1994).
Lurie, P. & Wolfe, S.M. N. Engl. J. Med. 337, 853–856 (1997).
Varmus, H. & Satcher, D. N. Engl. J. Med. 337, 1003–1005 (1997).
Angell, M. N. Engl. J. Med. 337, 847–849 (1997).
Crouch, R.A. & Arras, J.D. Hastings Cent. Rep. 28, 26–34 (1998).
Department of Health, Education and Welfare. Fed. Regist. 43, 53950–53956 (1978).
Fost, N. & Robertson, J. IRB 2, 5–6 (1980).
Ellis, G. Office for Protection from Research Risks 93–3 (1993).
McRae, A.D. & Weijer, C. Crit. Care Med. 30, 1146–1151 (2002).
Acknowledgements
The authors are grateful to C. Heilig at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention for preparing Figure 1. This work was supported by a Canadian Institutes of Health Research Investigator Award and Operating Grant (C.W.) and a doctoral fellowship from the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada (P.B.M.). C.W. is a Visiting Scholar at the Department of History and Philosophy of Science at the University of Cambridge and Visiting Fellow at Clare Hall, Cambridge, UK.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Weijer, C., Miller, P. When are research risks reasonable in relation to anticipated benefits?. Nat Med 10, 570–573 (2004). https://doi.org/10.1038/nm0604-570
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/nm0604-570
This article is cited by
-
Pragmatic trials can address diagnostic controversies: recent lessons from gestational diabetes
Trials (2022)
-
Risk and benefit for umbrella trials in oncology: a systematic review and meta-analysis
BMC Medicine (2022)
-
Ethical and practical considerations for cell and gene therapy toward an HIV cure: findings from a qualitative in-depth interview study in the United States
BMC Medical Ethics (2022)
-
Considerations for designing and implementing combination HIV cure trials: findings from a qualitative in-depth interview study in the United States
AIDS Research and Therapy (2021)
-
Individualized therapy trials: navigating patient care, research goals and ethics
Nature Medicine (2021)