Describe how you would ensure fair distribution of the study’s benefits and burdens.

OBJECTIVE:
Design a comprehensive set of ethical guidelines for conducting a medical study involving a large number of volunteers. Your guidelines should ensure the project is ethical, safe, and respects human dignity and protection. This essay will help you apply concepts from your coursework to practical scenarios in medical research.

INSTRUCTIONS:

Introduction (Approx. 1/4 page)
Briefly introduce the importance of ethical guidelines in medical research.
State the purpose of your essay: to outline and justify the guidelines you would implement in a large-scale medical study to ensure it adheres to ethical standards and protects participants.
Ethical Guidelines (Approx. 1 page)
Informed Consent:
Describe how you would ensure that all participants give informed consent. This includes providing clear and comprehensive information about the study’s purpose, procedures, risks, and benefits.
Explain how you would handle situations where participants may have difficulty understanding or providing consent, such as vulnerable populations.
Respect for Autonomy:
Outline measures to protect the autonomy of participants, ensuring that they voluntarily agree to participate without coercion.
Discuss how you would respect participants’ decisions to withdraw from the study at any time.
Beneficence and Non-Maleficence:
Detail how you would maximize the potential benefits of the study while minimizing harm to participants.
Include strategies for assessing and managing risks, including physical, psychological, legal, social, and economic risks.
Justice:

Describe how you would ensure fair distribution of the study’s benefits and burdens.
Address how you would avoid exploiting vulnerable or marginalized populations and ensure equitable access to the benefits of the research.
Oversight and Accountability:
Explain the role of Institutional Review Boards (IRBs) or similar review bodies in overseeing the study.
Discuss the importance of having a system for monitoring the study’s ethical conduct and addressing any issues that arise.
Confidentiality and Privacy:
Detail how you would protect participants’ privacy and ensure the confidentiality of their data.
Describe the measures you would put in place to secure data and prevent unauthorized access.
Conclusion (Approx. 1/4 page)
Summarize the key points of your guidelines.
Reflect on the importance of adhering to these guidelines to ensure the ethical conduct of the study and the protection of participants.
Note: This is not a research paper. The content of your response must be drawn from lectures or course reading assignments. You may not utilize any outside sources.
SUBMISSION GUIDELINES
To complete this assignment, click “Submit your assignment,” and then choose one of the following methods for submitting your work:
Drag and drop your file into the submission box, and then select “Submit file.”
Select the file you want to upload, and then select “Submit file.”
Please contact your instructor using Canvas Messages with any questions you may have. Your instructor may take several business days to grade all of your work. Please be patient as your instructor works to provide a level of feedback that corresponds to the hard work you put into the assignment.
EY PRINCIPLES OF ETHICAL MEDICAL RESEARCH

1. VOLUNTARY CONSENT
Essence: The voluntary consent of the human subject is absolutely essential.
Requirements:
The subject must have legal capacity to give consent.
Consent must be given freely, without any form of coercion or deception.
The subject must have sufficient knowledge and comprehension of the experiment to make an informed decision.
The subject must be informed of:
The nature, duration, and purpose of the experiment.
The methods and means of conducting the experiment.
Any potential risks, inconveniences, and effects on health.

2. RESPONSIBILITY FOR CONSENT
The responsibility for ensuring the quality of consent lies with each individual who initiates, directs, or engages in the experiment.
This is a personal duty and cannot be delegated to others.

3. PURPOSE OF THE EXPERIMENT
The experiment must aim to yield beneficial results for society, which cannot be obtained by other means.
It must not be random or unnecessary in nature.
4. SCIENTIFIC BASIS
The experiment should be designed based on:
Results of prior animal experimentation.
A thorough understanding of the disease or problem under study.
Anticipated results must justify the experiment.

5. MINIMIZATION OF HARM
The experiment should be conducted to avoid all unnecessary physical and mental suffering and injury.
No experiment should be conducted if there is reason to believe it will cause death or disabling injury, except possibly when the researchers themselves serve as subjects.

6. RISK ASSESSMENT
The degree of risk should never exceed what is justified by the humanitarian importance of the problem being addressed.
Proper precautions and facilities must be in place to protect subjects from even remote risks of injury, disability, or death.

7. QUALIFIED PERSONNEL
The experiment should be conducted by scientifically qualified persons.
The highest degree of skill and care must be maintained throughout all stages of the experiment.
8. RIGHT TO WITHDRAW
The human subject should be free to withdraw from the experiment at any time if they feel unable to continue.
9. OBLIGATION TO TERMINATE
The scientist in charge must be prepared to terminate the experiment if there is probable cause to believe that continuing it would likely result in injury, disability, or death to the subject.
DECLARATION OF HELSINKI
Due to the concern for inhumane research that came out of World War II, the Declaration of Helsinki was developed by the World Medical Association in 1964, with multiple revisions to follow. This document called to importance that the primary allegiance of a physician is to the patient. Hence, the purpose of medical research must be for the betterment of the patient. This document acknowledges risks and burdens associated with medical research, like clinical trials. However, it calls for equitable access of all people, regardless of race or gender, to be available to participate. The declaration also seeks a wider focus of responsibility, calling for environmental stewardship in research. It also brings attention to how a researcher may have a conflict of interest associated with research endeavors, acknowledging that a conflict of interest could seek to benefit the researcher over the participant. In this regard, the document introduces the idea of systematic and institutional review boards to oversee medical research to protect the participants. The document cautions against conducting research that focuses on vulnerable and marginalized population groups. As the document was revised over the years, its significance decreased because there was no longer world consensus to support all its claims, especially claims around standards of care associated with placebo trials.

BACKGROUND:
Developed by the World Medical Association in 1964 in response to concerns about inhumane research practices from World War II.
KEY POINTS:
Primary Allegiance: Physicians must prioritize the well-being of patients.
Purpose of Research: Must benefit the patient and be conducted ethically.
Equitable Access: Research participants should not be discriminated against based on race or gender.
Conflict of Interest: Researchers must avoid conflicts that benefit themselves over participants.
Oversight: Introduction of systematic and institutional review boards to oversee research.
Vulnerable Populations: Special caution is needed when researching vulnerable and marginalized groups.
LIMITATIONS:
The declaration has seen decreased significance due to lack of global consensus, especially regarding placebo trials.
Reference: https://inside.tamuc.edu/research/compliance/IRB-P…
NATIONAL RESEARCH SERVICE AWARD ACT
For instance, consider the Tuskegee Study. The Tuskegee syphilis study was a study that sought to record the natural progression of syphilis. It was titled the “Tuskegee Study of Untreated Syphilis in the Negro Male”. Researchers followed 600 Black men: 399 who had syphilis and 201 who did not have syphilis. Informed consent was not obtained. Participants were told they had “bad blood,” a colloquial term in the area for sickle-cell anemia, and needed treatment for this ailment. The standard medical treatment for syphilis was penicillin and was widely available; however, participants in this study were not offered treatment. In fact, they were prevented from seeking medical treatment from doctors who were not affiliated with the study and who might inform the participants of their real diagnosis. Instead, the men were given free medical exams, meals, and burial insurance. The study was later deemed “ethically unjustified”. The study took place from 1932-1972 (CDC, 2021) – forty years of men remaining untreated themselves, and potentially passing the disease on to their sex partners.Following the Tuskegee study, years later in 1974, the National Research Act was created. This legislation requires professionals who engage in research to undergo specific research training. It also regulates the establishment of institutional review boards within public health schools. Part of the legislation also restricts discrimination for religious purposes of people engaging or not engaging in research.
CONTEXT:
Introduced in response to the unethical Tuskegee Syphilis Study (1932-1972), which involved untreated syphilis in Black men without their informed consent.
KEY POINTS:
Training: Requires specific research training for professionals.
Institutional Review Boards (IRBs): Regulates establishment and function of IRBs.
Non-Discrimination: Protects against discrimination based on religious beliefs related to research participation.
Reference: https://www.congress.gov/bill/93rd-congress/house-…
BELMONT REPORT
The Belmont Report was written by the National Commission for the Protection of Human Subjects of Biomedical and Behavioral Research. This commission was birthed from the National Research Act of 1974. The Belmont Report seeks to identify key ethical principles essential to research involving human subjects. Through this report, public awareness was heightened regarding medical abuses within the arena of research. The three foundational sections of the Belmont Report are as follows: Boundaries Between Practice & Research, Basic Ethical Principles, and Application.
SECTION 1: BOUNDARIES BETWEEN PRACTICES & RESEARCH
The first section regarding boundaries between practice and research focuses on distinguishing the difference between research and practice. This is especially important for participants within research studies to understand the difference between treatment deemed experimental versus treatment that is standard practice. However, not all practice that is experimental is deemed research. This is because research is developed to test a hypothesis. Experimental treatment can be just experimental without falling into a well-defined research trial.

Distinction: Differentiates between experimental treatment (research) and standard practice.
Purpose: Research tests hypotheses, while experimental treatments may not always fit defined research trials.
SECTION 2: BASIC ETHICAL PRINCIPLES
The second section of the Belmont Report focuses on ethical principles, . This report focuses on three principles: respect, beneficence, and justice. Respect is indeed important because it protects people against discrimination. Respect also upholds the ethical principle of autonomy. It is equally important to protect individuals who do not have the capacity to uphold their own autonomy. The principle of autonomy demands that research participants enter research studies on their own accord. In other words, participation should be voluntary. Consider the dilemma that arises regarding populations who are unable to uphold their autonomy, like children or people who suffer from profound mental illness. Members of these vulnerable populations must be protected to avoid unfair risk by volunteering them to participate in research studies.The next principle discussed is beneficence. Again, this principle ensures actions toward people that will bring no harm to them. The responsibility to act out of beneficence applies to the researcher, participants, and society at large.Finally, justice deals with the concept of fairness within research studies. In essence, the burden associated with research should not be in excess. Justice attempts to reconcile both fairness and equality, which often do not go hand-in-hand without significant complexity. It is the responsibility of the primary investigators and supporting research committees to ensure these principles are upheld during the research process.Respect: Protects against discrimination and upholds autonomy; ensures voluntary participation, especially for vulnerable populations.
Beneficence: Ensures actions bring no harm and benefits society, participants, and researchers.Justice: Ensures fairness and equality in research burden and benefits.
SECTION 3: APPLICATION
The last portion of the Belmont Report focuses on the application of these principles. In an effort to uphold the principles, the concept of informed consent was developed. Informed consent, as discussed earlier in the module, ensures that participants are knowledgeable and acting in full autonomy, understanding the risk/benefits of the research they are participating in. Complete disclosure from the investigator and full comprehension from the participants is required to uphold safe research. Nonetheless, if research is truly experimental, it may be difficult to provide a full assessment of the risks and benefits associated with each research study. Risks within research are not limited to physical risks; they also include psychological, legal, social, and economic risks. Federal regulations seek to help protect participants by stating that the benefit must outweigh the risk of experimental research with human subjects.Informed Consent: Participants must be fully informed about the research, including risks and benefits.
Risk Assessment: Risks include physical, psychological, legal, social, and economic aspects. Benefits must outweigh risks.
Regulations: Federal regulations protect participants and ensure ethical research practices.Reference: https://www.hhs.gov/ohrp/regulations-and-policy/be…Examples below are given of completely unethical approaches (in the cases of Guatemala, many wrong aspects of genetics research and mind control) to medical research.
EXAMPLES OF UNETHICAL RESEARCH

GUATEMALA INOCULATION EXPERIMENTS
In the 1940s, Americans conducted unethical experiments on vulnerable populations in Guatemala to test drug treatment efficacy for sexually transmitted diseases. The population included prisoners, children, psychiatric patients, soldiers, and sex workers. It is important to note that all of these populations are considered to be at-risk, vulnerable populations. Consent was not obtained, people were not given a choice, and some of the populations were deliberately infected without their consent. One means of transmission included infecting sex workers in order to pass on diseases to unknowing prisoners. Another means of transmission was to infect children in orphanages. The researchers tested the use of penicillin against the sexually transmitted diseases. Knowledge of this research trial was not public until the 2000s. The primary investigator stored his research data at the University of Pittsburgh. The Presidential Commission for the Study of Bioethical Issues investigated these experiments and deemed them unethical. President Clinton attempted to reconcile these unethical experiments by publicly apologizing to Guatemala.

Last Completed Projects