Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31939717›Full record

ArticleHuman vaccines & immunotherapeutics2020

Ethical decision-making in biopharmaceutical research and development: applying values using the TRIP & TIPP model.

Tatjana Poplazarova, Claar van der Zee, Thomas Breuer

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Human vaccines & immunotherapeutics, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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

3 authors.

Tatjana PoplazarovaDepartment of Medical Governance & Bioethics, GSK Vaccines , Wavre, Belgium.ORCID 0000-0002-1121-0236
Claar van der ZeeDepartment of Medical Governance & Bioethics, GSK Vaccines , Wavre, Belgium.ORCID 0000-0002-4132-2589
Thomas BreuerDepartment of Medical Governance & Bioethics, GSK Vaccines , Wavre, Belgium.ORCID 0000-0003-2532-0505

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

"Values-based decision-making" frameworks and models are widely described in the literature in various disciplines, including healthcare settings. However, there is a paucity of literature on the application of systematic methods or models in the biopharmaceutical research and development (R&D) field of drugs, vaccines, and immunotherapeutics. In this report, we describe our model that uses company values along with framing questions in a five-step process to guide ethical decisions in the vaccines R&D context. The model uniquely supports practical prospective decision-making: employees are engaged as moral agents applying values and principles to guide their decision in a specific situation. We illustrate, by way of case studies, how the model is being used in practice. The consistent application of company values during decision-making calls upon employees to use their judgment, therefore reducing the need for the organization to systematically generate written instructions. Finally, we report on preliminary results of model adoption by teams within our organization, discuss its limitations and likely future contribution. We applied our model within a vaccines R&D context and believe its use can be extended to other areas where business-related decisions impact patients.

Indexed as

Biological ProductsDecision MakingHumansMoralsBiological Productsbioethicsbioindustry ethicsbiopharmaceuticaldecision making modeldecision making toolEthical decision makinghuman subject researchresearch and development (R&D)value-based decision makingvalues-based decision making

Identifiers

PMID31939717
PMCPMC7482740

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.