ReviewNeurology2020
AAN position statement: Ethical issues in clinical research in neurology.
Review in Neurology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Precision medicine in women with epilepsy: The challenge, systematic review, and future direction.Epilepsy & behavior : E&B · 2021Pooled it
- Nursing-Led Support Across the Standard Care-Clinical Trial-Standard Care Pathway in Inflammatory Bowel Disease: A Review With Realist-Informed Interpretation.JGH open : an open access journal of gastroenterology and hepatology · 2026Review
- Review
- Ethical challenges of capacity assessment in neurodevelopmental and intellectual disabilities.BMC medical ethics · 2026Article
- Design Matters: Challenges and Remedies in CREST-2.Stroke · 2026Article
- Review
- The science of uncertainty guides fetal-neonatal neurology principles and practice: diagnostic-prognostic opportunities and challenges.Frontiers in neurology · 2024Review
- Article
- Emerging Subspecialties in Neurology: Neuroethics: An Emerging Career Path in Neurology.Neurology · 2022Article
- Ethical Considerations in Clinical Trials for Disorders of Consciousness.Brain sciences · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
This update to the American Academy of Neurology's 1998 position statement endeavors to provide guidance for the consistent ethical conduct and review of neurologic research involving human participants. It does so by outlining a widely used ethical framework of 7 principles derived from the foundational documents of modern bioethics, including the Nuremberg Code, the World Medical Association's Declaration of Helsinki, the Belmont Report, and the US Department of Health and Human Service's Common Rule. The position statement then applies this principle-based framework to analyze and produce recommendations for the management of common and important ethical issues encountered in neurologic clinical research. These include institutional review board oversight, equitable research participant inclusion, cognitive impairment in research participants, international studies, the replication crisis, and genetic testing and modification.
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.