Abstract
Imagine a study in which HIV-infected pregnant women are given antiretroviral treatment (ART) to determine how effectively it will prevent HIV transmission during childbirth. Each mother’s involvement in this study ends with the birth of her child, at which time her access to antiretrovirals provided by the study also ceases. At the outset of the study, the investigator and sponsor agree that after the child’s birth, they will refer mothers who require treatment for their HIV to a national program that provides antiretroviral treatment and care. Assuming the Institutional Review Board (IRB) raises no objections to this plan, should the research team consider their ethical obligations to participants fulfilled? If the investigator and sponsor were to consult the Common Rule, they would find little to suggest that there are any further ethical issues to address.
Publisher
Cambridge University Press (CUP)
Subject
Health Policy,General Medicine,Issues, ethics and legal aspects
Reference80 articles.
1. Bench to Bedside: Mapping the Moral Terrain of Clinical Research
2. 62. Id.
3. Promoting research integrity: a new global effort
4. Notizen
5. 8. Id., at 10, 73. The Commission explicitly noted that including language about investigator obligations would help harmonize the Common Rule with the FDA's guidelines (21 CFR Section 312.60), but it would also help harmonize the regulations with research regulations from other countries. See, e.g., SA Health Info, “Ethics in Health Research,” available at (last visited April 24, 2013).
Cited by
5 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献