Abstract
During the past decennium, one of the main issues discussed in research ethics has been focused on the care that should be provided to the control group in a clinical trial. This discussion is also called the standard of care debate. Current international research ethics guidelines contain a wide variety of standards for the standard of careincluding the provision of the highest attainable, the best available, the best current, a proven, and an established effective treatment. In this article, we systematically review the currently used standards and argue that none of the current standards is adequate to serve as a universal standard for the standard of care. Alex London has made a substantial proposal for a universal standard, but universally adopting his standard is problematic. In this article, we propose a revised version of London's standard.
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| Pages (from-to) | 35-43 |
| Number of pages | 9 |
| Journal | American Journal of Bioethics |
| Volume | 9 |
| Issue number | 3 |
| DOIs | |
| Publication status | Published - 1 Mar 2009 |
Keywords
- Clinical equipoise
- Control group
- Double standards
- Randomized controlled trials
- Research ethics
- Standard of care
Fingerprint
Dive into the research topics of 'What is the best standard for the standard of care in clinical research?'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.Cite this
- APA
- Author
- BIBTEX
- Harvard
- Standard
- RIS
- Vancouver