Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28713147›Full record

ArticleNarrative inquiry in bioethics2017

To Enroll or Not to Enroll?: A Researcher Struggles with the Decision to Involve Study Participants in a Clinical Trial That Could Save Their Lives.

Roberto Abadie

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Narrative inquiry in bioethics, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. [List of Ethical Principles for Medical Research Involving Human Subjects].Revista alergia Mexico (Tecamachalco, Puebla, Mexico : 1993)
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

1 author.

Roberto Abadie

Funding

Injection Risk Networks in Rural Puerto RicoR01DA037117 · NIDA · UNIVERSITY OF NEBRASKA LINCOLN · PI DOMBROWSKI, KIRK, KHAN, BILAL · 2014 to 2018
$3.2M
NIDA NIH HHS R01 DA037117
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Hundreds of thousands of clinical trials are conducted annually around the world, working to further scientific knowledge and expand medical treatment. At the same time, clinical trials also present novel challenges to researchers who have access to large pools of research participants and are routinely approached by pharmaceutical companies seeking to recruit subjects for clinical trials. This case study discusses the ethical dilemmas faced by a community health investigator who received an invitation to enroll people who inject drugs (PWID) into a clinical trial of a drug that promised a new treatment option for Hepatitis C. The author elaborates on the ethical tensions that he confronted between "doing good" and "avoiding harm. The paper suggests that issues of distributive justice should also be considered, particularly when the drugs being tested might eventually command prices that place them out of reach of the population enrolled in the trial. This case does not attempt to provide an ethical road map to assist researchers in similar circumstances, but rather to illustrate some of the considerations involved in making a decision about whether or not to participate in clinical trials research.

Indexed as

Principle-Based EthicsSocial JusticeAttitudeBeneficenceBiomedical ResearchDecision MakingDrug CostsDrug UsersEthics, ResearchHepatitis CHumansPatient SelectionPrescription DrugsResearch PersonnelResearch SubjectsSocioeconomic FactorsPrescription Drugs

Identifiers

PMID28713147
PMCPMC5568791

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.