Principles of research ethics: A research primer for low- and middle-income countries.
Creator
Bitter Cindy C; Ngabirano AA; Simon E; Taylor D
Publisher
African Journal of Emergency Medicine : Revue Africaine de la Medecine d'urgence
Date
2020
2020-08-13
Description
Ethical oversight in the form of review boards and research ethics committees provide protection for research subjects as well as guidance for safe conduct of studies. As the number of collaborative emergency care research studies carried out in low- and middle-income countries increases, it is crucial to have a shared understanding of how ethics should inform choice of study topic, study design, methods of obtaining consent, data management, and access to treatment after closure of the study. This paper describes the basic principles of Western research ethics - respect for persons, beneficence, and justice - and how the principles may be contextualized in different settings, by researchers of various backgrounds with different funding streams. Examples of lapses in ethical practice of research are used to highlight best practices.
Munetz Mark R; Galon Patricia A; Frese Frederick J 3rd
Publisher
The journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law
Date
2003
1905-6
Description
The authors present three ethical arguments to address the controversy of mandatory community treatment: rights-based versus beneficence, utilitarian, and communitarian. Each approach suggests that mandatory community treatment can be an ethical intervention for individuals with severe mental disorders in well-defined circumstances. It is critical to recognize that such interventions cannot be effective in the absence of an adequately funded, quality mental health service system. Within such a system, the authors believe a program of mandatory community treatment may play an important role. In considering mandatory outpatient treatment, the authors argue that consideration of decisionmaking capacity is preferable to dangerousness criteria, that clinical criteria with some flexibility should be developed so that mandatory community treatment is used only when alternatives have failed, that mandatory community treatment should be implemented long enough to be effective, and that consumers must be involved in the development and implementation of mandatory outpatient treatment programs.
Subject
Humans; United States; Mental Disorders/*therapy; Patient Acceptance of Health Care; Beneficence; *Coercion; Commitment of Mentally Ill/*legislation & jurisprudence; Community Mental Health Services/*ethics/legislation & jurisprudence; Legal Approach; Mental Health Therapies; Patient Rights/*ethics
Rights
Article information provided for research and reference use only. All rights are retained by the journal listed under publisher and/or the creator(s).
Ethical principles contained in currently professed medical oaths.
Creator
Dickstein E; Erlen J; Erlen J A
Publisher
Academic medicine : journal of the Association of American Medical Colleges
Date
1991
1991-10
Description
This study analyzed the pledges received from all U.S. medical schools accredited in 1989 by the Liaison Committee on Medical Education of both the Association of American Medical Colleges and the American Medical Association to determine what pledges were affirmed and what ethical principles they contained. The Oath of Hippocrates was the most frequently affirmed pledge (the wording of which was used by 60 schools). Few oaths clearly demonstrated respect for patients' autonomy. The principle of veracity was not evident in any oath. However, nonmaleficence, beneficence, and justice were evident in half of the pledges, and confidentiality was included in three-fourths of them. The authors conclude that the medical oaths failed to address the changing doctor-patient relationship emerging in the 1990s, whereas they continued to affirm traditional principles of nonmaleficence and beneficence.
Subject
*Codes of Ethics; *Ethics; *Hippocratic Oath; Beneficence; Bioethics and Professional Ethics; Confidentiality; Empirical Approach; Humans; Medical; Patient Advocacy; Personal Autonomy; Physician-Patient Relations; Social Justice; United States