Movatterモバイル変換


[0]ホーム

URL:


Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
Thehttps:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

NIH NLM Logo
Log inShow account info
Access keysNCBI HomepageMyNCBI HomepageMain ContentMain Navigation
pubmed logo
Advanced Clipboard
User Guide

Full text links

HighWire full text link HighWire
Full text links

Actions

Share

Review
.2018 Feb;44(2):114-120.
doi: 10.1136/medethics-2017-104249. Epub 2017 Aug 5.

Informed consent in cluster randomised trials: new and common ethical challenges

Affiliations
Review

Informed consent in cluster randomised trials: new and common ethical challenges

Sapfo Lignou. J Med Ethics.2018 Feb.

Abstract

Cluster randomised trials are an increasingly important methodological tool in health research but they present challenges to the informed consent requirement. In the relatively limited literature on the ethics of cluster research there is not much clarity about the reasons for which seeking informed consent in cluster randomised trials may be morally challenging. In this paper, I distinguish between the cases where informed consent in cluster trials may be problematic due to the distinct features of 'population-based' interventions, which have not been adequately discussed in the research ethics literature, and the cases where informed consent may be problematic for reasons that investigators also encounter in other research designs. I claim that informed consent requirements in cluster trials should be adjusted to the level of risk involved, arguing for a more comprehensive notion of research risk than that currently found in the research ethics guidelines, and the amount of freedom to be sacrificed in relation to a particular research aim. I conclude that these two factors are the most important to consider when assessing whether a cluster study should proceed when informed consent is infeasible or difficult to obtain.

Keywords: clinical trials; public health ethics; research ethics.

© Article author(s) (or their employer(s) unless otherwise stated in the text of the article) 2018. All rights reserved. No commercial use is permitted unless otherwise expressly granted.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Competing interests: None declared.

Similar articles

See all similar articles

Cited by

See all "Cited by" articles

Publication types

MeSH terms

LinkOut - more resources

Full text links
HighWire full text link HighWire
Cite
Send To

NCBI Literature Resources

MeSHPMCBookshelfDisclaimer

The PubMed wordmark and PubMed logo are registered trademarks of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS). Unauthorized use of these marks is strictly prohibited.


[8]ページ先頭

©2009-2025 Movatter.jp