10
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      The clinical investigator-subject relationship: a contextual approach

      review-article
      1 ,
      Philosophy, Ethics, and Humanities in Medicine : PEHM
      BioMed Central

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Background

          The nature of the relationship between a clinical investigator and a research subject has generated considerable debate because the investigator occupies two distinct roles: clinician and scientist. As a clinician, the investigator has duties to provide the patient with optimal care and undivided loyalty. As a scientist, the investigator has duties to follow the rules, procedures and methods described in the protocol.

          Results and conclusion

          In this article, I present a contextual approach to the investigator-subject relationship. The extent of the investigator's duty to provide the patient/subject with clinical care can vary from one situation to the next, as a function of several factors, including: the research design, benefits and risks of the research; the subject's reasonable expectations, motivations, and vulnerabilities; the investigator's ability to benefit the subject; and the investigator's prior relationship with the subject. These and other factors need to be considered when determining the clinical investigator's obligations to provide clinical care to human research subjects. In some research contexts, the investigator has extensive clinical obligations to the patient/subject; in others, the investigator has minimal ones.

          Related collections

          Most cited references42

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Managing incidental findings in human subjects research: analysis and recommendations.

          No consensus yet exists on how to handle incidental findings (IFs) in human subjects research. Yet empirical studies document IFs in a wide range of research studies, where IFs are findings beyond the aims of the study that are of potential health or reproductive importance to the individual research participant. This paper reports recommendations of a two-year project group funded by NIH to study how to manage IFs in genetic and genomic research, as well as imaging research. We conclude that researchers have an obligation to address the possibility of discovering IFs in their protocol and communications with the IRB, and in their consent forms and communications with research participants. Researchers should establish a pathway for handling IFs and communicate that to the IRB and research participants. We recommend a pathway and categorize IFs into those that must be disclosed to research participants, those that may be disclosed, and those that should not be disclosed.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: not found
            • Article: not found

            The ethics of clinical research in the Third World.

            M Angell (1997)
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: not found
              • Article: not found

              Unethical trials of interventions to reduce perinatal transmission of the human immunodeficiency virus in developing countries.

                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Philos Ethics Humanit Med
                Philosophy, Ethics, and Humanities in Medicine : PEHM
                BioMed Central
                1747-5341
                2009
                3 December 2009
                : 4
                : 16
                Affiliations
                [1 ]National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences, National Institutes of Health, Box 12233, Mail Drop CU03, Research Triangle Park, NC, 27709, USA
                Article
                1747-5341-4-16
                10.1186/1747-5341-4-16
                2794289
                19958542
                8f331324-6628-477c-b99e-c3f2a1afd404
                Copyright ©2009 Resnik; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.

                This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

                History
                : 21 June 2009
                : 3 December 2009
                Categories
                Review

                Philosophy of science
                Philosophy of science

                Comments

                Comment on this article