Therapeutic misconception—a false belief that individuals will benefit from participating in research—can bias informed consent. Ethics consultants can help by engaging participants’ and researchers’ understandings of risks and benefits and by asking good questions about the influences of researchers’ enthusiasm.
AMA J Ethics. 2018; 20(11):E1100-1106. doi:
10.1001/amajethics.2018.1100.
Prevention efforts can marginalize patients by stigmatizing certain behaviors, so distinguishing individual professionals’ preferences about those behaviors is critical.
AMA J Ethics. 2019; 21(6):E536-539. doi:
10.1001/amajethics.2019.536.
Hannah R. Sullivan and Scott J. Schweikart, JD, MBE
Legal questions regarding clinicians’ and technology manufacturers’ liability arise when algorithmic recommendations generated by the technology are hard to understand.
AMA J Ethics. 2019; 21(2):E160-166. doi:
10.1001/amajethics.2019.160.
Haley Moulton, Benjamin Moulton, JD, MPH, Tim Lahey, MD, MMSc, and Glyn Elwyn, MD, PhD, MSc
Shared decision making in research informed consent conversations is complex due to diverse and potentially divergent interests of investigators and patient-subjects.
AMA J Ethics. 2020; 22(5):E365-371. doi:
10.1001/amajethics.2020.365.
Drs Katrina Bramstedt and Ana Iltis discuss the development of QoL assessment tools to help patient-subjects considering reconstructive transplantation.