The moral and legal status of Health Care Workers in Cluster Randomized Trials: A response to Weijer and Taljaard.

Clicks: 421
ID: 16463
2019
Article Quality & Performance Metrics
Overall Quality
Not rated
Combines reader engagement with the AI quality analysis. This article has not been analysed, so there is no overall score — reader engagement is measured and shown alongside.
AI Quality Assessment
Not analyzed
Readership in this journal
Steady

Ranked #10 of 75 articles by views in journal of clinical epidemiology

Most read Least read

Bar heights use a square-root scale.

Mint this article as an NFT
Not yet minted

Create a permanent, verifiable on-chain record of this article on the Scimatic Network. The NFT is held in your Journament account, and you can withdraw it to your own wallet at any time.

5 SUSD one-off · no wallet required
Sign in to mint
Abstract
In 2012 Charles Weijer and colleagues published "The Ottawa Statement on the ethical design and conduct of cluster randomized trials". In 2015, we reflected on this statement and argued that three recommendations in this statement need to be further refined. Weijer and Taljaard have responded to our comments in this issue of the journal. They agree with one of the proposed revisions but not with two others. In this commentary we argue that the main reason why there is disagreement about two of our refinements is that we have different views on the moral and legal status of the health care workers as "research participants" in cluster randomized trials. In this commentary we clarify misunderstandings about our view expressed in 2015 and elaborate on the positions of health care workers in CRTs. We argue that there is sufficient reason to doubt whether the rights and interests of HCWs should be protected by means of ethics guidance documents and laws on human subjects research. Their interests are protected in the first place by professional codes of conduct which ensure that they cannot provide substandard care. Furthermore, protection of HCWs by ethics guidance on human subjects research will create an enormous burden for principle investigators and research ethics committees. Further debate is essential to determine how the interests of HCWs in CRTs can be protected best.
Reference Key
van-der-graaf2019thejournal Use this key to autocite in the manuscript while using SciMatic Manuscript Manager or Thesis Manager
Authors van der Graaf, Rieke;van Thiel, Ghislaine;Hoop, Esther Oomen-de;Moons, Karel G M;Grobbee, Diederick E;van Delden, Johannes J M;
Journal journal of clinical epidemiology
Year 2019
DOI
S0895-4356(19)30630-4
URL
Keywords Keywords not found

Citations

No citations found. To add a citation, contact the admin at info@scimatic.org

Comments

No comments yet. Be the first to comment on this article.