Clinical equipoise: Difference between revisions
No edit summary |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 8: | Line 8: | ||
[[Category:Medical research]] | [[Category:Medical research]] | ||
[[Category:Medical ethics]] | [[Category:Medical ethics]] | ||
[[Category: Statistics]] | |||
Revision as of 14:43, 30 April 2009
Please Take Over This Page and Apply to be Editor-In-Chief for this topic: There can be one or more than one Editor-In-Chief. You may also apply to be an Associate Editor-In-Chief of one of the subtopics below. Please mail us [1] to indicate your interest in serving either as an Editor-In-Chief of the entire topic or as an Associate Editor-In-Chief for a subtopic. Please be sure to attach your CV and or biographical sketch.
Clinical equipoise, also known as the principle of equipoise, provides the ethical basis for medical research involving randomly assigning patients to different treatment arms. Unlike uncertainty principle that relies on individual belief of researcher, clinical equipoise explicitly states that there must "exists . . . an honest, professional disagreement among expert clinicians about the preferred treatment"[1]. Even if the clinician personally prefers one arm over the other, randomization is still ethically sound when there are other responsible and competent clinicans who believe the other way around.
Sources and References
[1] Freedman B. Equipoise and the ethics of clinical research. N Engl J Med 1987; 317: 141-145.