ArticleEthics & human research2019
The Role of Inclusion Benefits in Ethics Committee Assessment of Research Studies.
Article in Ethics & human research, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 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
12 citing papers in PubMed.
- Participant Perspectives and Experiences Following an Intensively Monitored Antiretroviral Pause in the United States: Results from the AIDS Clinical Trials Group A5345 Biomarker Study.AIDS research and human retroviruses · 2022Trial
- Participant Perspectives and Experiences Entering an Intensively Monitored Antiretroviral Pause: Results from the AIDS Clinical Trials Group A5345 Biomarker Study.AIDS research and human retroviruses · 2021Trial
- Participant Perspectives in an HIV Cure-Related Trial Conducted Exclusively in Women in the United States: Results from AIDS Clinical Trials Group 5366.AIDS research and human retroviruses · 2020Trial
- Ethical Implications of Study Terminations.Pediatrics · 2025Article
- Social Impacts of Multi-City HIV Research Participation Among Sexual and Gender Expansive Individuals in Kazakhstan.Journal of acquired immune deficiency syndromes (1999) · 2025Article
- Participant experiences in HIV cure-directed trial with an extended analytical treatment interruption in Philadelphia, United States.HIV research & clinical practice · 2023Article
- Perceived risks and benefits of enrolling people with HIV at the end of life in cure research in Southern California, United States.Journal of virus eradication · 2023Article
- Ethics of HIV cure research: an unfinished agenda.BMC medical ethics · 2021Review
- Perceptions of Next-of-Kin/Loved Ones About Last Gift Rapid Research Autopsy Study Enrolling People with HIV/AIDS at the End of Life: A Qualitative Interview Study.AIDS research and human retroviruses · 2020Article
- Altruism: Scoping review of the literature and future directions for HIV cure-related research.Journal of virus eradication · 2020Article
- Awareness of Jordanian Investigators About the Importance of Ethics Review Committees: A Pilot Study.Science and engineering ethics · 2020Article
- Applying the Behavioural and Social Sciences Research (BSSR) Functional Framework to HIV Cure Research.Journal of the International AIDS Society · 2019Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The relationship between risks and benefits is central to the ethics of research involving human participants. Traditionally, to be ethically justifiable, risks should be reasonable in relation to anticipated benefits (if any) to subjects and to the potential social benefits resulting from research. This calculus is being further complicated by findings from an increasing number of social science studies that reveal that prospective and actual research participants frequently describe various types of inclusion benefits (for example, personal benefits such as access to or improved health care, increased knowledge about their disease or condition, and greater solidarity with the local community) as important to them. What is the ethical significance of such inclusion benefits, particularly those nonmedical in nature, for research ethics committees' risk-benefit assessment of research studies? We argue that, unless participants are clearly mistaken in their perceptions, ethics committees should take these types of inclusion benefits into account, and we suggest a few ways this might look in practice.
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.