ArticleIranian journal of pediatrics2012
Key ethical issues in pediatric research: islamic perspective, Iranian experience.
Article in Iranian journal of pediatrics, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- What can the citations of systematic reviews of ethical literature tell us about their use?-an explorative empirical analysis of 31 reviews.Systematic reviews · 2023Article
- Assent and consent in adolescent research: teachers' perspectives from a developing country.Heliyon · 2020Article
- Developing an Islamic Research Ethics Framework.Journal of religion and health · 2019Article
- Assent and consent in pediatric and adolescent research: school children's perspectives.Adolescent health, medicine and therapeutics · 2019Article
- General approaches to ethical reasoning in Islamic biomedical ethics discourse.Journal of medical ethics and history of medicine · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThe importance of pediatric research especially in the ethically proven trials resulted in considerable legislative attempts in association with compiling ethical guidelines. Because of children's vulnerability conducting pediatric research raises different ethical issues; the two most important of which are informed consent and risk-benefit assessment. Differences in religious and socio-cultural context limit implication of ethical standards.
methodsAt the aim of finding a solution we critically reviewed guidelines, and literatures as well as Islamic points in addition to comparing different viewpoints in application of ethical standards in pediatric research.
findingsThe literature review showed that pediatric research guidelines and authors' viewpoints have the same basic ethical core, but there are some variations; depend on cultural, religious, and social differences. Furthermore, these standards have some limitations in defining informed consent according to child's age and capacity upon application.
conclusionIn this regard Islamic approach and definition about growth development and puberty sheds light and clarifies a clearer and more rational address to the issue.
Indexed as
Identifiers
23429172PMC3533141What 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.