4/29/2023 0 Comments Incidental findings![]() ![]() Incidental findings can crop up in a number of ways. ![]() However, we acknowledge that the standard would face significant practical barriers, and these barriers lead us to propose a metaconsent addendum that would allow subjects to essentially waive the comprehension standard when resource or other constraints make meeting it impracticable. We will offer a preliminary defense of this alternative as best respecting participants’ autonomy and privacy and promoting their interests. While such medical beneficence should not be discarded, the need to give proper attention to participants’ autonomy, privacy, and interests (especially considering discussion of participants’ right not to know) suggests an alternative standard for when to report incidental findings: even if they are of no direct medical benefit, incidental findings should be reported based on the extent to which the participant can be expected to comprehend the information. In this article, we address the common view that reporting of incidental findings should be based primarily on the possibility of medical benefit, factoring in the findings’ validity, clinical actionability, and significance to health or reproduction. A consensus, however, is not necessarily correct. These incidental findings, as they are known, have been the focus of a substantial amount of discussion in the bioethics literature, and a consensus has begun to emerge about what researchers should do in light of the possibility of incidental findings. During the course of biomedical research, researchers sometimes obtain information on participants that is outside the aim of the study but may nonetheless be relevant to the participants. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |