Is Informed Consent Always Necessary for Randomized, Controlled Trials?
- 11 March 1999
- journal article
- Published by Massachusetts Medical Society in New England Journal of Medicine
- Vol. 340 (10), 804-807
- https://doi.org/10.1056/nejm199903113401013
Abstract
Consider this paradox: if a physician reads a case report about a novel method of ventilation for critically ill patients and wants to try it in the next several patients with respiratory failure he or she treats, the physician may do so provided the patients have given general consent for treatment. On the other hand, if a physician is interested in performing a randomized, controlled trial to determine rigorously which of two widely used antibiotics is more effective at treating bronchitis, he or she must prepare a formal protocol, obtain approval from the institutional review board, and seek written informed . . .Keywords
This publication has 15 references indexed in Scilit:
- Informed consent: Protection or obstacle? Some emerging issuesControlled Clinical Trials, 1997
- Fifty Years Later: The Significance of the Nuremberg CodeNew England Journal of Medicine, 1997
- Making sense of randomization; responses of parents of critically ill babies to random allocation of treatment in a clinical trialSocial Science & Medicine, 1997
- World Medical Association declaration of Helsinki. Recommendations guiding physicians in biomedical research involving human subjectsJAMA, 1997
- Informed consent in clinical trials. Informed consent difficult in paediatric intensive care.BMJ, 1993
- Factors affecting quality of informed consent.BMJ, 1993
- Equipoise and the Ethics of Clinical ResearchNew England Journal of Medicine, 1987
- CONSENT TO RANDOMISED TREATMENTThe Lancet, 1982
- The Tuskegee Syphilis StudyNew England Journal of Medicine, 1973
- Ethics and Clinical ResearchNew England Journal of Medicine, 1966