Abstract
The possibility of generating incidental findings — in both research and clinical contexts — has long been regarded as a risk of these enterprises. Should incidental findings (IFs) in research also be regarded as potential benefits? At first glance, it would seem they ought to be. After all, in particular circumstances or given a particular set of values, any piece of information can be beneficial. Therefore, it may seem incoherent or unduly paternalistic to regard IFs only as risks. Moreover, developments in science and technology increasingly transform what was once of uncertain meaning and dubious value into information that is likely to have clear meaning and potential personal value, if not obvious clinical utility. For these reasons, it would seem that in the future, IFs should be treated as potential benefits in the design and regulation of research.
Publisher
Cambridge University Press (CUP)
Subject
Health Policy,General Medicine,Issues, ethics and legal aspects
Reference28 articles.
1. “False Hopes and Best Data: Consent to Research and the Therapeutic Misconception,”;King;Hastings Center Report,1987
2. Managing Incidental Findings in Human Subjects Research: Analysis and Recommendations
3. What Makes Clinical Research Ethical?
4. 4. Of course, sometimes IFs are managed according to a one-size-must-suit-all policy established at the institutional or clinic level. Nevertheless, such policies — like all clinical practice guidelines — should be developed with the welfare of the typical patient or majority of patients in mind.
5. The Changing Face of "Misidentified Paternity"
Cited by
46 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献，注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献，订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献