scholarly journals Vulnérabilité des femmes enceintes en éthique de la recherche : un problème sémantique

2019 ◽  
Vol 2 (2) ◽  
pp. 11-14
Author(s):  
Sihem Neïla Abtroun

This commentary explores the notion of vulnerability applied to pregnant women in clinical research. The use of this notion, related to a semantic problem, raises an ethical issue and participates in the quasi-systematic exclusion of this sub-population from the research process.

Author(s):  
Pamela J. McKenzie

Caring relationships are recognized as important resources for information seekers. I consider how nine pregnant women map their relationships with their midwives as they evaluate them as information sources. Data come from interviews. Women described the relationship as a trajectory, beginning with the “idea” of a midwife. As women get to know their midwife, they are able to draw on a set of resources, including the relationship itself, as informative. These resources are not static but are re-negotiated on an ongoing basis. A single encounter therefore maps both to the trajectory of the relationship and to a broader discursive community.Les relations bienveillantes sont reconnues comme ressources importantes pour ceux qui cherchent de l'information. En analysant les données de neuf entrevues, je tenterai de déterminer comment neuf femmes enceintes se représentent leur relation avec leur sage-femme vue comme source d'information. Les femmes décrivent leur relation comme une trajectoire qui s'appuie sur « l'idée » qu'elles se font d'une sage-femme. Au fur et à mesure que la relation avec leur sage-femme évolue, les femmes peuvent se prévaloir d'un ensemble de ressources informatives, y compris la relation elle-même. Ces ressources ne se veulent pas statiques, mais bien renégociées de façon continue. Une rencontre unique représente alors la trajectoire d'une relation ainsi que d'une communauté discursive. 


2021 ◽  
Vol 21 (11) ◽  
pp. 32-35
Author(s):  
Barbara E. Bierer ◽  
Ari Ne’eman ◽  
Willyanne DeCormier Plosky ◽  
David H. Strauss ◽  
Benjamin C. Silverman ◽  
...  

2018 ◽  
Vol 28 (13) ◽  
pp. 2033-2047 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kyoko Wada ◽  
Marilyn K. Evans ◽  
Barbra de Vrijer ◽  
Jeff Nisker

Limited clinical research with pregnant women has resulted in insufficient data to promote evidence-informed prenatal care. Charmaz’s constructivist grounded theory methodology was used to explore how research with pregnant women would be determined ethically acceptable from the perspectives of pregnant women, health care providers, and researchers in reproductive sciences. Semistructured interviews were conducted with a purposive sample of 12 pregnant women, 10 health care providers, and nine reproductive science researchers. All three groups suggested the importance of informed consent and that permissible risk would be very limited and complex, being dependent on the personal benefits and risks of each particular study. Pregnant women, clinicians, and researchers shared concerns about the well-being of the woman and her fetus, and expressed a dilemma between promoting research for evidence-informed prenatal care while securing the safety in the course of research participation.


2019 ◽  
Vol 13 (10) ◽  
pp. e0007763 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ricardo Arraes de Alencar Ximenes ◽  
Demócrito de Barros Miranda-Filho ◽  
Elizabeth B. Brickley ◽  
Ulisses Ramos Montarroyos ◽  
Celina Maria Turchi Martelli ◽  
...  

2018 ◽  
Vol 115 (11) ◽  
pp. 2590-2594 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kay Dickersin ◽  
Evan Mayo-Wilson

We find standards useful in everyday life and in science, although we do not always follow them. Adopting new standards can be expensive, so there may be a strong incentive to maintain the status quo rather than adopt new standards. The scientific community has many standards encompassing both doing clinical research and reporting it, including standards for design and measurement. Although existing research standards have improved both research and its reporting, we need to unify existing standards and to fill the gaps between steps throughout the research process. Existing gaps include implementation of standards and links between standards for study registration (to know about all studies undertaken), study protocols (to identify the preplanned study design and methods), data collection (to assess outcomes that are important and comparable across studies), dissemination of findings (to know the results of previous studies), data sharing (to make best use of existing data), and evidence synthesis (to draw appropriate conclusions from the body of evidence). The scientific community must work together to harmonize existing standards, to ensure that standards are kept up to date, to check that standards are followed, and to develop standards where they are still needed. A unified system of standards will make our work more reproducible.


1996 ◽  
Vol 24 (1) ◽  
pp. 36-46 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nancy E. Kass ◽  
Holly A. Taylor ◽  
Patricia A. King

Since the beginning of the AIDS epidemic, the proportion of AIDS cases among women has continued to rise. Women constituted 23 percent of the AIDS cases reported to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) in 1995, and 81 percent of these women were of childbearing age (13 to 44 years). It was not until 1991, however, that epidemiological studies of women were initiated. By comparison, the representation of HIV-infected women in clinical trials gradually has grown. Undoubtedly, a consequence of the increased numbers of women in clinical and epidemiological research is the earlier identification of and more appropriate treatments for HIV-related syndromes when women present in the clinical setting. Despite this expanded focus on women, however, clear information to guide the treatment of HIV-infected women who are pregnant is still lagging behind.


2017 ◽  
Vol 18 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Indira S. E. van der Zande ◽  
Rieke van der Graaf ◽  
Martijn A. Oudijk ◽  
Johannes J. M. van Delden

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document