Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
  1. Home
  2. Search

Refine search

Refine search

Access:
Content type:
Publication date:
Apply   From and To filters
Subject: Show more
Journals Show more
Publishers: Show more
Societies Show more
Series: Show more
Collections: Show more

Actions for selected content:

Select all | Deselect all
  • View selected items
  • Export citations
  • Download PDF (zip)
  • Save to Kindle
  • Save to Dropbox
  • Save to Google Drive

Save Search

You can save your searches here and later view and run them again in "My saved searches".

Please provide a title, maximum of 40 characters.
Cancel
×

2 results

  • 44 - The ethics of expert testimony

  • from 6 - Anesthesiologists, the state, and society
  • Edited by Gail A. Van Norman, University of Washington, Stephen Jackson, Stanley H. Rosenbaum, Susan K. Palmer
  • Book:
    Clinical Ethics in Anesthesiology
    Published online:
    05 March 2012
    Print publication:
    28 October 2010, pp 261-265

  • Summary

    Research on the management of pain and other symptoms is crucial to provide better care for acute, postoperative, and chronic symptoms, as well as better symptom management at the end of life. Some aspects do present difficulties more specific to the context of symptom management studies. These include difficulties related to scientific methodology, fair subject selection, obtaining a favorable risk/benefit ratio, and informed consent. Researchers always have the obligation to obtain informed consent from research subjects. Even with explicit patient consent, the researcher has the obligation to minimize risk and discomfort to the patient. Research involving symptomatic relief at the end of life is ethical, but requires special considerations. Particular attention to subject comfort and safety is important in placebo-controlled trials. Patient assessment of benefits and burdens may shift during the trial and require reconsideration.

  • “RESPECT” IN RESEARCH WITH PEOPLE WITH LEARNING DISABILITIES

  • Chris Kiernan
  • Journal:
    Behavioural and Cognitive Psychotherapy / Volume 27 / Issue 2 / March 1999
    Published online by Cambridge University Press:
    01 March 1999, pp. 117-124
    Print publication:
    March 1999

  • There would be broad agreement with the need to address the issues put forward by Clements, Rapley and Cummins amongst service providers and researchers in learning disability. However, these authors' presentation of their arguments may well unnecessarily antagonize both groups. Additionally, it is suggested, the authors fail to identify the different paradigmatic bases of their proposals and thereby miss the opportunity to air genuine ethical dilemmas in learning disability research.