Difference between revisions of "Resource:840c6a43-e373-4927-ae94-f4f583535a2e"
Marc.VanHoof (talk | contribs) |
|||
| (2 intermediate revisions by 2 users not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{Resource | {{Resource | ||
|Resource Type=Cases | |Resource Type=Cases | ||
| − | |Title= | + | |Title=The Ethics of Public Health Research on Less Expensive, Less Effective Interventions |
| − | |Is About= | + | |Is About=This factual case analyses a study in which public health researchers investigated a less effective but also less expensive health measure. This study raised social justice and ethical concerns. Some argued that the study promoted inequality as the research subjects were not receiving the best possible treatment, while others argued that the subjects were treated as a mere means to further scientific knowledge. Therefore, this case examines whether studying an intervention that is less effective than known measures can ever be justified. |
| − | |Important Because= | + | <references /> |
| − | + | |Important Because=The rights of research subjects should be protected in all cases. One of the central principles in healthcare is to provide the best treatment possible. However, as stated in the article, sometimes a public health measure can be so expensive that one cannot reasonably expect taxpayers to carry its financial burden. Accordingly, it can be useful to have less expensive, but also less efficacious public health interventions. Nonetheless, the usage of such a less expensive measure may only be justified in certain situations. The ethical framework outlined in this article may help to decide when it is justified to study and use such less effective public health measures. <br /> | |
| − | + | <references /> | |
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
|Important For=Researchers | |Important For=Researchers | ||
}} | }} | ||
| Line 14: | Line 11: | ||
|Has Link=https://ajph.aphapublications.org/doi/10.2105/AJPH.2005.063719 | |Has Link=https://ajph.aphapublications.org/doi/10.2105/AJPH.2005.063719 | ||
}} | }} | ||
| − | {{Related To}} | + | {{Related To |
| + | |Related To Theme=Theme:9ac8c1db-f98b-41ee-858d-a8c93a647108 | ||
| + | }} | ||
{{Tags | {{Tags | ||
|Has Location=USA; United States | |Has Location=USA; United States | ||
| − | |Has Virtue And Value=Respect | + | |Has Virtue And Value=Respect; Autonomy |
|Has Good Practice And Misconduct=Informed consent; Exploitation | |Has Good Practice And Misconduct=Informed consent; Exploitation | ||
|Related To Research Area=Clinical medicine | |Related To Research Area=Clinical medicine | ||
}} | }} | ||
Latest revision as of 16:40, 9 July 2021
ResourcesThe Ethics of Public Health Research on Less Expensive, Less Effective Interventions
What is this about?
This factual case analyses a study in which public health researchers investigated a less effective but also less expensive health measure. This study raised social justice and ethical concerns. Some argued that the study promoted inequality as the research subjects were not receiving the best possible treatment, while others argued that the subjects were treated as a mere means to further scientific knowledge. Therefore, this case examines whether studying an intervention that is less effective than known measures can ever be justified.
Why is this important?
The rights of research subjects should be protected in all cases. One of the central principles in healthcare is to provide the best treatment possible. However, as stated in the article, sometimes a public health measure can be so expensive that one cannot reasonably expect taxpayers to carry its financial burden. Accordingly, it can be useful to have less expensive, but also less efficacious public health interventions. Nonetheless, the usage of such a less expensive measure may only be justified in certain situations. The ethical framework outlined in this article may help to decide when it is justified to study and use such less effective public health measures.
