ArticleThe Journal of clinical ethics2012
Time to stop worrying about the therapeutic misconception.
Article in The Journal of clinical ethics, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Oncologists' knowledge, practices and ethical opinions about therapeutic misconception: a French national survey.BMC medical ethics · 2025Article
- Factors associated with clinical trial participation for patients with renal cell carcinoma.Urologic oncology · 2023Article
- Adolescent Research Participants' Descriptions of Medical Research.AJOB empirical bioethics · 2016Article
- Living laboratory: whole-genome sequencing as a learning healthcare enterprise.Clinical genetics · 2015Review
- Problems with the consensus definition of the therapeutic misconception.The Journal of clinical ethics · 2013Article
- An exploratory study of therapeutic misconception among incarcerated clinical trial participants.AJOB empirical bioethicsArticle
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Work on the therapeutic misconception suggests that investigators should ensure that potential research subjects understand the fundamental differences between clinical research and clinical care. Yet, what potential research subjects should understand depends on their circumstances and the study in question. This analysis implies that researchers and review committees should stop attempting to define, measure, and dispel the therapeutic misconception, and instead should focus on what potential subjects should understand to participate in individual studies.
Indexed as
Identifiers
23256408What 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.