ReviewPhilosophy, ethics, and humanities in medicine : PEHM2009
The clinical investigator-subject relationship: a contextual approach.
Review in Philosophy, ethics, and humanities in medicine : PEHM, 2009. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 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
10 citing papers in PubMed.
- Ethical decision-making and role conflict in managing a scientific laboratory.Accountability in research · 2024Article
- Patient, Relative and Staff Experiences of Clinical Trial Participation in Neurooncology: "Maybe You Can Also Show the Positive, No Matter How It Ends".Cancer management and research · 2024Article
- Do Clinicians Have a Duty to Participate in Pragmatic Clinical Trials?The American journal of bioethics : AJOB · 2023Article
- Philosophical Foundations of Human Research Ethics.Perspectives in biology and medicine · 2022Review
- Beyond Consent: Building Trusting Relationships With Diverse Populations in Precision Medicine Research.The American journal of bioethics : AJOB · 2018Article
- Moral Stress and Job Burnout Among Frontline Staff Conducting Clinical Research on Affective and Anxiety Disorders.Professional psychology, research and practice · 2016Article
- Performance enhancement, elite athletes and anti doping governance: comparing human guinea pigs in pharmaceutical research and professional sports.Philosophy, ethics, and humanities in medicine : PEHM · 2014Article
- Do researchers have an obligation to actively look for genetic incidental findings?The American journal of bioethics : AJOB · 2013Article
- Excluded, not dismissed: enhancing benefit in clinical research.Contemporary clinical trials · 2013Article
- The placebo enigma revisited.Clinical medicine (London, England) · 2011Article
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
Abstract
backgroundThe nature of the relationship between a clinical investigator and a research subject has generated considerable debate because the investigator occupies two distinct roles: clinician and scientist. As a clinician, the investigator has duties to provide the patient with optimal care and undivided loyalty. As a scientist, the investigator has duties to follow the rules, procedures and methods described in the protocol. RESULTS AND
conclusionIn this article, I present a contextual approach to the investigator-subject relationship. The extent of the investigator's duty to provide the patient/subject with clinical care can vary from one situation to the next, as a function of several factors, including: the research design, benefits and risks of the research; the subject's reasonable expectations, motivations, and vulnerabilities; the investigator's ability to benefit the subject; and the investigator's prior relationship with the subject. These and other factors need to be considered when determining the clinical investigator's obligations to provide clinical care to human research subjects. In some research contexts, the investigator has extensive clinical obligations to the patient/subject; in others, the investigator has minimal ones.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.