The problem of informed consent in emergency medicine research
Author:
Open Access
- 1 May 2001
- journal article
- review article
- Published by BMJ in Emergency Medicine Journal
- Vol. 18 (3) , 198-204
Abstract
The CRASH Trial (Corticosteroid Randomisation After Significant Head injury), which started in April 1999 hopes to answer the question of whether or not there is any benefit to giving high dose corticosteroids after significant head injuries. To do this patients are randomised to receive either the standard care for head injuries, as defined by the receiving hospital, or standard care plus a 48 hour infusion of corticosteroids. This is to be started within eight hours of injury, preferably as soon as possible. As all eligible patients will have a reduced level of consciousness informed consent has been deemed unnecessary. In this review the issue of consent in human experimentation is presented with a special emphasis on the problems faced in emergency medicine research, and the way these have been tackled.Keywords
This publication has 23 references indexed in Scilit:
- The Need to Revise the Declaration of HelsinkiNew England Journal of Medicine, 1999
- Proposed Revisions to the Declaration of Helsinki — Will They Weaken the Ethical Principles Underlying Human Research?New England Journal of Medicine, 1999
- Is Informed Consent Always Necessary for Randomized, Controlled Trials?New England Journal of Medicine, 1999
- Informed consent in human experimentation before the Nuremberg codeBMJ, 1996
- Immediate versus Delayed Fluid Resuscitation for Hypotensive Patients with Penetrating Torso InjuriesNew England Journal of Medicine, 1994
- Deferred consent: Use in clinical resuscitation researchAnnals of Emergency Medicine, 1990
- Ethics and Human ExperimentationNew England Journal of Medicine, 1987
- DO WE NEED INFORMED CONSENT?The Lancet, 1986
- Deferred consent. A new approach for resuscitation research on comatose patientsJAMA, 1986
- Medical Ethics and Controlled TrialsBMJ, 1963