Comment on 'A research participant's rights as an ethical dilemma'

Paul A. Komesaroff

doi:10.1111/j.1753-6405.2012.00945.x

Comment on 'A research participant's rights as an ethical dilemma'

Paul A. Komesaroff

Research output: Contribution to journal › Comment / Debate › Other › peer-review

Abstract

The Editorial by Jane, Davis and Bell poses the question of when in the course of a clinical trial, in which treatment allocations are blinded, information about such allocations should be released to research participants. The authors also ask whether there are circumstances in which an individual participant can demand that this information be provided. The questions are interesting because the different circumstances in which they may arise demonstrate different levels of ethical decision-making within the researcher-participant relationship.

Original language	English
Pages (from-to)	511
Number of pages	1
Journal	Australian and New Zealand Journal of Public Health
Volume	36
Issue number	6
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1753-6405.2012.00945.x
Publication status	Published - Dec 2012

UN SDGs

This output contributes to the following UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)

SDG 3 Good Health and Well-being

Access to Document

10.1111/j.1753-6405.2012.00945.x

Cite this

@article{c6bbf243fc384517b30e21342028c25f,

title = "Comment on 'A research participant's rights as an ethical dilemma'",

abstract = "The Editorial by Jane, Davis and Bell poses the question of when in the course of a clinical trial, in which treatment allocations are blinded, information about such allocations should be released to research participants. The authors also ask whether there are circumstances in which an individual participant can demand that this information be provided. The questions are interesting because the different circumstances in which they may arise demonstrate different levels of ethical decision-making within the researcher-participant relationship.",

author = "Komesaroff, \{Paul A.\}",

year = "2012",

month = dec,

doi = "10.1111/j.1753-6405.2012.00945.x",

language = "English",

volume = "36",

pages = "511",

journal = "Australian and New Zealand Journal of Public Health",

issn = "1326-0200",

publisher = "Elsevier BV",

number = "6",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Comment on 'A research participant's rights as an ethical dilemma'

AU - Komesaroff, Paul A.

PY - 2012/12

Y1 - 2012/12

N2 - The Editorial by Jane, Davis and Bell poses the question of when in the course of a clinical trial, in which treatment allocations are blinded, information about such allocations should be released to research participants. The authors also ask whether there are circumstances in which an individual participant can demand that this information be provided. The questions are interesting because the different circumstances in which they may arise demonstrate different levels of ethical decision-making within the researcher-participant relationship.

AB - The Editorial by Jane, Davis and Bell poses the question of when in the course of a clinical trial, in which treatment allocations are blinded, information about such allocations should be released to research participants. The authors also ask whether there are circumstances in which an individual participant can demand that this information be provided. The questions are interesting because the different circumstances in which they may arise demonstrate different levels of ethical decision-making within the researcher-participant relationship.

UR - https://www.scopus.com/pages/publications/84871807303

U2 - 10.1111/j.1753-6405.2012.00945.x

DO - 10.1111/j.1753-6405.2012.00945.x

M3 - Comment / Debate

C2 - 23216481

AN - SCOPUS:84871807303

SN - 1326-0200

VL - 36

SP - 511

JO - Australian and New Zealand Journal of Public Health

JF - Australian and New Zealand Journal of Public Health

IS - 6

ER -

Comment on 'A research participant's rights as an ethical dilemma'

Abstract

UN SDGs

Access to Document

Other files and links

Cite this