Jump to content

Talk:Belmont Report: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
WikiProject class rating: ~~~~ Discrepancy between article content (6 principles) and Belmont Report itself (3 principles)
Assessment: banner shell, Medicine, Philosophy (Rater)
 
(6 intermediate revisions by 6 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
{{WikiProject banner shell|class=C|1=
{{WPMED|class=Start|importance=Mid}}
{{WikiProject Medicine|importance=Mid}}
{{WikiProject Philosophy|importance=Low|literature=yes|ethics=yes|contemporary=yes}}
{{WikiProject United States|importance=Low}}
}}


==Wikipedia discrepancy with Belmont Report itself==
{{philosophy|importance=|class=Start|auto=yes|ethics=yes}}
== WikiProject class rating==
This article was automatically assessed because at least one WikiProject had rated the article as stub, and the rating on other projects was brought up to Stub class. [[User:BetacommandBot|BetacommandBot]] 03:48, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

== Wikipedia discrepancy with Belmont Report itself==
This Wikipedia article lists six fundamental ethical 'principles' for using any human subjects for research:
This Wikipedia article lists six fundamental ethical 'principles' for using any human subjects for research:
(1) Autonomy: Respect for persons: protecting the autonomy of all people and treating them with courtesy and respect and allowing for informed consent;
(1) Autonomy: Respect for persons: protecting the autonomy of all people and treating them with courtesy and respect and allowing for informed consent;
Line 30: Line 30:
Hope this helps. The article should be rewritten.
Hope this helps. The article should be rewritten.
[[Special:Contributions/134.174.140.111|134.174.140.111]] ([[User talk:134.174.140.111|talk]]) 19:15, 26 July 2010 (UTC)
[[Special:Contributions/134.174.140.111|134.174.140.111]] ([[User talk:134.174.140.111|talk]]) 19:15, 26 July 2010 (UTC)
[[User:MaynardClark|MaynardClark]] ([[User talk:MaynardClark|talk]]) 19:16, 26 July 2010 (UTC) [Sorry: forgot to log in] [[User:MaynardClark|MaynardClark]] ([[User talk:MaynardClark|talk]]) 19:16, 26 July 2010 (UTC)
:'''Done''' - I guess someone has done it. I can see only 3 principle now. Thanks to who has done it. --[[User:Abhijeet Safai|Abhijeet Safai]] ([[User talk:Abhijeet Safai|talk]]) 06:40, 23 August 2013 (UTC)

Latest revision as of 03:24, 25 July 2024

Wikipedia discrepancy with Belmont Report itself

[edit]

This Wikipedia article lists six fundamental ethical 'principles' for using any human subjects for research: (1) Autonomy: Respect for persons: protecting the autonomy of all people and treating them with courtesy and respect and allowing for informed consent; (2) Beneficence: maximizing benefits for the research project while minimizing risks to the research subjects; and (3) Justice: ensuring reasonable, non-exploitative, and well-considered procedures are administered fairly (the fair distribution of costs and benefits to potential research participants.) (4) Fidelity: fairness, and equality. Balance of Risks and Benefits (5) Non-maleficence: Do no harm. (6) Veracity: Be truthful, no deception.

However, the Belmont Report (1979) itself lists only THREE (3) ethical principles for HSR (human subjects research): • Autonomy obtain informed consent protect privacy maintain confidentiality • Beneficence assessment of risk/benefit • Justice equitable selection of subjects

Where are proportionality and the balance of risks and benefits? Fidelity or Non-Maleficence?

Well, the Belmont Report itself lists only the first three principles, and the six ethical principles Wikipedia cites for human subjects research break out beneficence into and non-maleficence (so there is one of the extra ‘principles’), fidelity (balancing risks and harms) is usually included in the principle of justice (so there is another one of the extra ‘principles’), and veracity is part of respect for persons (under autonomy) (so there is the final extra ‘principle’).

Hope this helps. The article should be rewritten. 134.174.140.111 (talk) 19:15, 26 July 2010 (UTC) MaynardClark (talk) 19:16, 26 July 2010 (UTC) [Sorry: forgot to log in] MaynardClark (talk) 19:16, 26 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Done - I guess someone has done it. I can see only 3 principle now. Thanks to who has done it. --Abhijeet Safai (talk) 06:40, 23 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]