Uncertainty and equipoise: at interplay between epistemology, decision making and ethics.

PubWeight™: 0.95‹?› | Rank: Top 15%

🔗 View Article (PMC 3183244)

Published in Am J Med Sci on October 01, 2011

Authors

Benjamin Djulbegovic1

Author Affiliations

1: Center and Division for Evidence-based Medicine and Health Outcome Research, Clinical Translational Science Institute, University of South Florida, Tampa, Florida, USA. bdjulbeg@health.usf.edu

Articles cited by this

Judgment under Uncertainty: Heuristics and Biases. Science (1974) 34.89

Equipoise and the ethics of clinical research. N Engl J Med (1987) 17.24

What makes clinical research ethical? JAMA (2000) 14.34

Ethics and clinical research. N Engl J Med (1966) 12.75

On the elicitation of preferences for alternative therapies. N Engl J Med (1982) 7.85

The uncertainty principle and industry-sponsored research. Lancet (2000) 7.75

Trials: the next 50 years. Large scale randomised evidence of moderate benefits. BMJ (1998) 6.13

A critique of clinical equipoise. Therapeutic misconception in the ethics of clinical trials. Hastings Cent Rep (2003) 6.00

Risk as analysis and risk as feelings: some thoughts about affect, reason, risk, and rationality. Risk Anal (2004) 5.29

The therapeutic orientation to clinical trials. N Engl J Med (2003) 5.11

Of mice but not men. Problems of the randomized clinical trial. N Engl J Med (1991) 4.85

Ethical issues in the design and conduct of randomised controlled trials. Health Technol Assess (1998) 4.55

Equipoise and the dilemma of randomized clinical trials. N Engl J Med (2011) 4.34

Clinical trials and medical care: defining the therapeutic misconception. PLoS Med (2007) 3.77

For and against: clinical equipoise and not the uncertainty principle is the moral underpinning of the randomised controlled trial. BMJ (2000) 3.55

Perceptions of patients and physicians regarding phase I cancer clinical trials: implications for physician-patient communication. J Clin Oncol (2003) 3.31

Treatment success in cancer: new cancer treatment successes identified in phase 3 randomized controlled trials conducted by the National Cancer Institute-sponsored cooperative oncology groups, 1955 to 2006. Arch Intern Med (2008) 3.07

Evidence, belief, and action: the failure of equipoise to resolve the ethical tension in the randomized clinical trial. J Law Med Ethics (2002) 2.74

At what level of collective equipoise does a clinical trial become ethical? J Med Ethics (1991) 2.66

Maximizing versus satisficing: happiness is a matter of choice. J Pers Soc Psychol (2002) 2.56

Accountability for reasonableness: an update. BMJ (2008) 2.29

Acknowledgment of uncertainty: a fundamental means to ensure scientific and ethical validity in clinical research. Curr Oncol Rep (2001) 2.09

Doing new research? Don't forget the old. PLoS Med (2004) 1.96

New paradoxes of risky decision making. Psychol Rev (2008) 1.95

Value of high-cost cancer care: a behavioral science perspective. J Clin Oncol (2007) 1.65

Community equipoise and the architecture of clinical research. Camb Q Healthc Ethics (1997) 1.61

Articulating and responding to uncertainties in clinical research. J Med Philos (2007) 1.51

Is clinical research still too haphazard? Lancet (2001) 1.51

What is the prior probability of a proposed new treatment being superior to established treatments? BMJ (1997) 1.48

Choosing a control intervention for a randomised clinical trial. BMC Med Res Methodol (2003) 1.41

Access before approval--a right to take experimental drugs? N Engl J Med (2006) 1.35

Casting and drawing lots: a time honoured way of dealing with uncertainty and ensuring fairness. BMJ (2001) 1.34

Dual processing in reasoning: two systems but one reasoner. Psychol Sci (2006) 1.33

Uncertainty about clinical equipoise. Equipose and uncertainty principle are not mutually exclusive. BMJ (2001) 1.33

A regret theory approach to decision curve analysis: a novel method for eliciting decision makers' preferences and decision-making. BMC Med Inform Decis Mak (2010) 1.23

Theories of medical decision making and health: an evidence-based approach. Med Decis Making (2008) 1.15

Evaluating the risks of clinical research. JAMA (2010) 1.09

When should potentially false research findings be considered acceptable? PLoS Med (2007) 1.07

The paradox of equipoise: the principle that drives and limits therapeutic discoveries in clinical research. Cancer Control (2009) 1.04

A new era of unapproved drugs: the case of Abigail Alliance v Von Eschenbach. JAMA (2007) 1.01

Gnosis and random allotment. Control Clin Trials (1981) 0.96

Evidence-based medicine for rare diseases: implications for data interpretation and clinical trial design. Cancer Control (2007) 0.96

The irrelevance of equipoise. J Med Philos (2007) 0.96

Information processing models of cognition. Annu Rev Psychol (1979) 0.96

Decision-making when data and inferences are not conclusive: risk-benefit and acceptable regret approach. Semin Hematol (2008) 0.91

At what degree of belief in a research hypothesis is a trial in humans justified? J Eval Clin Pract (2002) 0.87

Screening mammography at 40-49 years: regret or no regret? Lancet (2006) 0.86

Academia's failure to support systematic reviews. Lancet (2005) 0.86

When is it rational to participate in a clinical trial? A game theory approach incorporating trust, regret and guilt. BMC Med Res Methodol (2012) 0.86

Ethical problems created by the hopelessly unconscious patient. N Engl J Med (1968) 0.82

Views on treatment necessity, harm, and benefits in patients using statins. Med Decis Making (2009) 0.79