Randomized trials in vulnerable populations

被引:17
作者
Cook, Deborah [1 ]
Moore-Cox, Anne [2 ,3 ]
Xavier, Denis [3 ,4 ,5 ]
Lauzier, Francois [6 ]
Roberts, Ian [7 ]
机构
[1] McMaster Univ, Fac Hlth Sci, Dept Med, Hamilton, ON L8N 3Z5, Canada
[2] McMaster Univ, Fac Hlth Sci, Dept Clin Epidemiol & Biostat, Hamilton, ON L8N 3Z5, Canada
[3] McMaster Univ, Fac Hlth Sci, Populat Hlth Res Inst, Hamilton, ON L8N 3Z5, Canada
[4] St Johns Med Coll, Dept Pharmacol, Bangalore, Karnataka, India
[5] St Johns Med Coll, Div Clin Trials, Bangalore, Karnataka, India
[6] Univ Laval, Dept Med, Quebec City, PQ G1K 7P4, Canada
[7] London Sch Hyg & Trop Med, London WC1, England
关键词
D O I
10.1177/1740774507087552
中图分类号
R-3 [医学研究方法]; R3 [基础医学];
学科分类号
1001 ;
摘要
Many persons enrolled in clinical trials can be considered vulnerable, and such trials often raise concerns because of the diminished ability of vulnerable persons to consider and protect their own interests. However, this research is necessary to answer important questions, such as which interventions are effective, which have no impact, and which do more harm than good. In this article, we identified six specific challenges associated with randomized clinical trials in vulnerable populations and have suggested several potential solutions to overcome these challenges. First addressed were macro issues, such as the scope of the problem, and research capacity in terms of funding and investigators. Next, we have addressed research ethics review, informed consent, regulatory hurdles, and serious adverse event reporting. As clinical trials are expanding globally, all stakeholders (investigators, granting agencies, REBs, DSMBs, regulatory bodies, universities, hospitals, clinicians, patients, and family members) should be aware of the challenges we have outlined, and work collaboratively toward effective solutions that improve the quality, quantity, safety, and relevance of clinical trials for vulnerable persons around the world.
引用
收藏
页码:61 / 69
页数:9
相关论文
共 24 条
  • [1] Arnold DM, 2007, CLIN INVEST MED, V30, pE93
  • [2] Reforming research ethics committees - Latest proposals are a missed opportunity for a radical review
    Ashcroft, RE
    Newson, AJ
    Benn, PMW
    [J]. BRITISH MEDICAL JOURNAL, 2005, 331 (7517): : 587 - 588
  • [3] Cook D, 2006, UPD INT CAR, V43, P311
  • [4] Cook D, 1997, INTENSIVE CARE WORLD, V14, P68
  • [5] An Institutional Review Board dilemma: responsible for safety monitoring but not in control
    DeMets, David L.
    Fost, Norman
    Powers, Madison
    [J]. CLINICAL TRIALS, 2006, 3 (02) : 142 - 148
  • [6] What makes clinical research ethical?
    Emanuel, EJ
    Wendler, D
    Grady, C
    [J]. JAMA-JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION, 2000, 283 (20): : 2701 - 2711
  • [7] Finfer S, 2004, NEW ENGL J MED, V350, P2247
  • [8] *GLOB FOR HLTH RES, 2000, 1090 WHO GLOB FOR HL
  • [9] The Good Clinical Practice guideline: a bronze standard for clinical research
    Grimes, DA
    Hubacher, D
    Nanda, K
    Schulz, KF
    Moher, D
    Altman, DG
    [J]. LANCET, 2005, 366 (9480) : 172 - 174
  • [10] Informed consent in clinical trials in critical care: experience from the PAC-Man Study
    Harvey, Sheila E.
    Elbourne, Diana
    Ashcroft, Joanne
    Jones, Carys M.
    Rowan, Kathryn
    [J]. INTENSIVE CARE MEDICINE, 2006, 32 (12) : 2020 - 2025