Clinical Research upon Mentally Ill Subjects Who Cannot Give Informed Consent

1978 ◽  
Vol 133 (4) ◽  
pp. 366-369 ◽  
Author(s):  
I. G. Pryce

The ProblemOver the last two decades increasing attention has been paid to the rights and safety of the subjects of clinical research. A key safeguard against any abuse has been the requirement to obtain the subject's informed, valid or true consent, which has been defined by the Medical Research Council as ‘consent freely given with proper understanding of the nature and consequences of what is proposed’ (M.R.C., 1962–3). However, it has been recognized by the M.R.C. that it may not be possible to obtain such consent from, among others, some subjects who are mentally ill. Whether or not a research project should be carried out on such subjects should depend, they say, on whether or not ‘there are reasonable grounds for believing that a particular new procedure will contribute to the benefit of that particular patient…’, and further, ‘when true consent cannot be obtained, procedures which are of no direct benefit and which might carry a risk of harm to the subject should not be undertaken’ (M.R.C., 1962–3).

1971 ◽  
Vol 1 (5) ◽  
pp. 429-436 ◽  

The Clinical Research Department was started at Graylingwell Hospital, Chichester, Sussex, by Dr. J. Carse in 1947, when the hospital was administered by Sussex County Council. The first director was Dr. (now Professor) E. Stengel, and he undertook the first systematic follow-up of leucotomized patients. From 1950 to 1955 the director was Dr. Martin Roth; his studies on the psychoses of old age, and especially those delineating depressive psychoses, are now a landmark in clinical research. At about this time, the means by which clinical research in the National Health Service hospitals should be administered was reviewed and a policy evolved whereby departments in which clinical research was prospering and whose further development would make financial demands beyond those available to the regional hospital boards would be considered for support by the Medical Research Council.


1926 ◽  
Vol 72 (296) ◽  
pp. 51-58 ◽  
Author(s):  
H. A. Scholberg ◽  
Edwin Goodall

This work was carried out mainly with financial assistance from the Medical Research Council, to whom the results have been com municated, and to whom our thanks are due.Having regard to the paucity of information on the subject of the phosphorus and calcium-content of blood and cerebro-spinal fluid in the psychoses, and to the consideration that at this mental hospital a research laboratory in chemistry is available, it seemed desirable to investigate these matters.


1923 ◽  
Vol 22 (2) ◽  
pp. 175-207 ◽  
Author(s):  
E. G. D. Murray

“Virulence” is an ill-defined term and its use frequently gives rise to disputes, which remain unresolved because the disputants have no common basis other than that the term applies to organisms which cause disease. Thus it is imperative that the writer clearly defines the meaning of the term virulence as used in this paper, that the issue may not be confused by the reader approaching the subject from a different point of view.


2003 ◽  
Vol 26 (1) ◽  
pp. 34 ◽  
Author(s):  
Christopher Jackson ◽  
Norman Broadhurst ◽  
and Nikolai Bogduk

An audit was conducted to determine if epidural injections for back pain and sciatica were practised in accordance with guidelines prescribed by the National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC). More than 80% of injections were used for conditions for which they were not indicated, and which the NHMRC considers experimental. Most commonly, epidural injections afforded no benefit to the patients, yet were often repeated. In no instance was informed consent recorded as recommended by the NHMRC. The practice of epidural injections is dissonant both with the evidence-based literature and with recommended guidelines, and squanders both financial and professional resources.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document