This Article  • Full text  • PDF  • Send to a friend  • Save in My Folder  • Save to citation manager  • Permissions  Citing Articles  • Citation map  • Contact me when this article is cited  Related Content  • Similar articles in this journal  Topic Collections  • Medical Practice  • Conflict of Interest  • Medical Ethics  • Pain  • End-of-life Care/ Palliative Medicine  • Pediatrics, Other  • Statistics and Research Methods  • Advice for Patients  • Alert me on articles by topic  Social Bookmarking   What's this?

Adam Rapoport, MD, FRCPC, MHSc

Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med. 2009;163(8):688-691.

	Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text and any section headings.

Some of the principal factors hindering the development and conduct of pediatric palliative care (PPC) research—which ranges from observational to interventional study designs involving children with life-threatening conditions, their parents, or their siblings—stem from ethical concerns.¹ This article reviews these ethical concerns, which may be divided into 2 domains: (1) the balance of risk and benefits and (2) informed consent and autonomy. We will examine the evidence regarding the validity of these concerns and consider how foreseeable ethical challenges might be resolved through thoughtful study design. With appropriate (but not prohibitive) safeguards in place, PPC research can be conducted ethically, promoting evidence-based improvement in the care provided to these children and their families.

RISKS AND BENEFITS

All studies involving human subjects must obtain ethical endorsement from institutional review boards (IRBs). Approval is based primarily on the balance of potential harms and benefits, yet the risks of PPC research . . . [Full Text of this Article]

INFORMED CONSENT AND AUTONOMY

CONCLUSIONS

AUTHOR INFORMATION


CiteULike    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter     What's this?