ArticleJournal of medical ethics2004
Canaries in the mines: children, risk, non-therapeutic research, and justice.
Article in Journal of medical ethics, 2004. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
13 citing papers in PubMed.
- The Submissive Relationship of Public Health to Government, Politics, and Economics: How Global Health Diplomacy and Engaged Followership Compromise Humanitarian Relief.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2020Article
- Reporting to parents on children's exposures to asthma triggers in low-income and public housing, an interview-based case study of ethics, environmental literacy, individual action, and public health benefits.Environmental health : a global access science source · 2018Article
- Cultural barriers to African American participation in anxiety disorders research.Journal of the National Medical Association · 2013Article
- Adapting standards: ethical oversight of participant-led health research.PLoS medicine · 2013Article
- Ethical aspects of vulnerability in research.Poiesis & praxis : international journal of ethics of science and technology assessment · 2012Article
- Understanding bureaucracy in health science ethics: toward a better institutional review board.American journal of public health · 2009Article
- Environmental Health Research Involving Human Subjects: Ethical Issues.Environmental health insights · 2008Article
- Societal and ethical issues in human biomonitoring--a view from science studies.Environmental health : a global access science source · 2008Article
- A public health perspective on research ethics.Journal of medical ethics · 2006Article
- Justice and fairness in the Kennedy Krieger Institute lead paint study: the ethics of public health research on less expensive, less effective interventions.American journal of public health · 2006Article
- Children's understanding of the risks and benefits associated with research.Journal of medical ethics · 2005Article
- Ethical concerns regarding guidelines for the conduct of clinical research on children.Journal of medical ethics · 2005Article
- Randomized controlled trials in environmental health research: ethical issues.Journal of environmental healthArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The Kennedy Krieger lead paint study received a lot of attention after a US Court of Appeals ruled that a parent cannot consent to the participation of a child in non-therapeutic research. The ruling has raised fears that, if it goes unchallenged, valuable research might not proceed and ultimately all children would be harmed. The author discusses significant aspects of the study that have been neglected, and argues that the study was unethical because it involved injustice and its design meant that the study lacked importance and value. Issues of benefit, risk, and consent are vital, but it is sometimes a mistake to consider these issues before settling questions about justice and the importance and value of a research project. The author concludes by offering a strategy for researchers and reviewers of research to appreciate, in a vivid way, the implications of research participation.
Indexed as
Identifiers
15082813PMC1733843What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.