Lay conceptions of the ethical and scientific justifications for random allocation in clinical trials.
نویسندگان
چکیده
Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) play a central role in modern medical advance, and they require participants who understand and accept the procedures involved. Published evidence suggests that RCT participants often fail to understand that treatments are allocated at random and that clinicians are in equipoise about which treatment is best. We examine background assumptions that members of the public might draw upon if invited to take part in a RCT. Four studies (N=82; 67; 67; 128), in the UK, identified whether members of the public (i). accept that an individual clinician might be genuinely unsure which of two treatments was better; (ii). judge that when there is uncertainty it is acceptable to suggest deciding at random; (iii). recognise scientific benefits of random allocation to treatment conditions in a trial. Around half the participants were loathe to accept that a clinician could be completely uncertain, and this was no different whether the context was one of individual treatment or research. Most participants found it unacceptable to suggest allocating treatment at random, though there was weak evidence that a research context may reduce the unacceptability. Participants did not judge that more certain knowledge would be gained about which treatment was best when treatments were allocated at random rather than by patient/doctor choice: scientific benefits of randomisation were apparently not recognised. Judgements were no different in non-medical contexts. Results suggest a large mismatch between the assumptions underlying the trial design, and the assumptions that lay participants can bring to bear when they try to make sense of descriptive information about randomisation and equipoise. Previous attempts to improve understanding by improving the clarity or salience of trial information, or of making explicit the research context, while helpful, may need to be supplemented with accessible explanations for random allocation.
منابع مشابه
Quality Assessment of Published Clinical Trials of Mashhad University of Medical Sciences Between 1999 and 2018
Background and Objectives: Clinical trials are used extensively in the compilation of systematic review studies and clinical guidelines. Critical appraisal of articles is a part of systematic review writing and also effective in citation. This study aimed to evaluate quality of randomized clinical trial articles of Mashhad University of Medical Sciences with consideration report of randomized, ...
متن کاملتصادفی سازی در مطالعات کارآزمایی بالینی: از تئوری تا عمل
Background & Aim: Randomized clinical trials (RCTs) are studies which are able to provide the most valid evidence to compare various interventions in health research. Biases can affect the quality of research and ultimately make the results of a study invalid. One of the most important biases is selection bias. The best way to reduce selection bias is the use of random allocation. The aim of th...
متن کاملO-18: Framework of Informed Consent and Ethical Codes for Clinical Trials Especially Designed for Assisted Reproduction
Background Clinical trials are known as the most valid medical research. It is able to promote medical evidences on prevention, diagnosis, screening, treatment, and quality of life because in this type of study, an intervention is intentionally performed on subjects. Therefore, it encompasses ethical concerns and considerations, especially when human subjects are studied. In other words, clinic...
متن کاملRole of Stem Cells in Cardiac Cell Therapy and Tissue Engineering
Background: In spite of promising results of conventional treatments for myocardial infarction, including medications, stent implantation, and coronary artery bypass grafting, the disease and its complications, especially heart failure, are highly prevalent because these methods could not reverse the cell loss, which is the main problem. Currently, heart transplantation, as the last option f...
متن کاملQuality of Randomization in Clinical Trials Published in Persian Journals of Medical Sciences Indexed in Scopus during 2013-2017
Background and Objectives: Randomization is one of the principles of correct clinical trial. The aim of this study was to determine the quality of randomization in the published articles of clinical trials in the Persian-language journals indexed in Scopus. ed in Scopus D Methods: In this cross-sectional study, all clinical trials published in Persian journals indexed in Scopus during 2013-2...
متن کاملذخیره در منابع من
با ذخیره ی این منبع در منابع من، دسترسی به آن را برای استفاده های بعدی آسان تر کنید
عنوان ژورنال:
- Social science & medicine
دوره 58 4 شماره
صفحات -
تاریخ انتشار 2004