ArticleRevista medica del Instituto Mexicano del Seguro Social
[Clinical research XXIV. From clinical judgment to ethics in research on humans].
Article in Revista medica del Instituto Mexicano del Seguro Social. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- De vuelta a la clínica: sin justificación no existe pregunta de investigación que valga.Gaceta medica de Mexico · 2019Review
- Perception of clinical management in the child and adolescent population with acute mental health conditions.Revista CuidarteArticle
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Bioethics in research is an essential part of the structured review process of an article and it is based on three fundamental principles: respect for persons, beneficence and justice. In addition to not providing valid knowledge, a research with inadequate design, execution and statistical analysis is not ethical either, since these methodological deficiencies will produce information that will not be useful and, therefore, the risks that the participants were exposed to will have been in vain. Beyond scientific validity, there are other aspects that outline if an investigation is ethical, such as the clinical and social value of a study, a fair selection of participants, favorable risk-benefit balance, an independent review, the informed consent and respect for participants and potential participants. Throughout the article here presented, the documents that profile the behavior of investigators to protect the participants, such as the Declaration of Helsinki, the national regulations that rule us and the differences between research without risk, with minimal risk and with greater than minimal risk are discussed. That like in daily life, behavior in research involving human participants must be self-regulated, ie, people with knowledge of the existence of the law discover that the man is outside the realm of nature where work is done under the necessity of natural causality, and falls within the scope of the will; only if the man is free to decide their actions may be a law regulating their action.
Indexed as
Identifiers
25354061PMC7380687What 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.