Miranda B. Olson, MSc, Stacey Springs, PhD, and Jay Baruch, MD
Responsible arts in health research requires interrogating what counts as evidence, especially when the insistence on rigor risks oversimplifying and diminishing what’s ineffable about the arts.
AMA J Ethics. 2022;24(7):E617-621. doi:
10.1001/amajethics.2022.617.
Clara C. Hildebrandt, MD and Jonathan M. Marron, MD, MPH
Gene editing with CRISPR/Cas9 raises concerns about equitable access to therapies that could limit research participation by minority group members. These concerns can be addressed through public education, transparency, and stakeholder partnerships.
AMA J Ethics. 2018;20(9):E826-833. doi:
10.1001/amajethics.2018.826.
Holly K. Tabor, PhD and Aaron Goldenberg, PhD, MPH
Rare genetic disease research has something to teach precision medicine about addressing some patients’ limited access to treatment. Health disparities exacerbated by high costs and limited availability of drugs can, perhaps, be mitigated when patient activism accelerates drug development.
AMA J Ethics. 2018;20(9):E834-840. doi:
10.1001/amajethics.2018.834.
Aside from its use to rule out potential physical causes of a patient’s condition, for example a brain tumor, neuroimaging is not used in the process of psychiatric diagnosis.
The FDA’s expanded access pathway allows patients with no other therapeutic options to request access to investigational agents, but manufacturers do not often grant it.
AMA J Ethics. 2015;17(12):1142-1146. doi:
10.1001/journalofethics.2015.17.12.stas1-1512.
Surgery’s unique characteristics, including difficulties in standardizing, blinding, and recruiting participants for clinical trials, render problematic the application of evidence-based standards to surgery.