束缚创新:行业支持的临床试验监管

S. Fry-Revere, Matthew Ray, D. Malmstrom
{"title":"束缚创新:行业支持的临床试验监管","authors":"S. Fry-Revere, Matthew Ray, D. Malmstrom","doi":"10.2139/SSRN.2713171","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Over the past three decades, collaborative arrangements between academic biomedical researchers and private industry have grown dramatically, resulting in medical innovations that have benefited society greatly. However, a growing chorus of criticism directed at private companies that sponsor and conduct biomedical research casts doubt on the very ethos of science. Academics and anti-business activists have waged a campaign against industry-sponsored clinical trials that denies the fundamentally commercial nature of such research and hinders medical progress. These critics point to a small number of unfortunate and tragic cases in which financial conflicts of interest may have played a role in research-related injuries and deaths in order to unjustifiably condemn the profit motive in biomedical research as a whole.","PeriodicalId":410798,"journal":{"name":"Medical-Legal Studies eJournal","volume":"94 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2010-02-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Shackling Innovation the Regulation of Industry Supported Clinical Trials\",\"authors\":\"S. Fry-Revere, Matthew Ray, D. Malmstrom\",\"doi\":\"10.2139/SSRN.2713171\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Over the past three decades, collaborative arrangements between academic biomedical researchers and private industry have grown dramatically, resulting in medical innovations that have benefited society greatly. However, a growing chorus of criticism directed at private companies that sponsor and conduct biomedical research casts doubt on the very ethos of science. Academics and anti-business activists have waged a campaign against industry-sponsored clinical trials that denies the fundamentally commercial nature of such research and hinders medical progress. These critics point to a small number of unfortunate and tragic cases in which financial conflicts of interest may have played a role in research-related injuries and deaths in order to unjustifiably condemn the profit motive in biomedical research as a whole.\",\"PeriodicalId\":410798,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Medical-Legal Studies eJournal\",\"volume\":\"94 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2010-02-09\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Medical-Legal Studies eJournal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.2713171\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Medical-Legal Studies eJournal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.2713171","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

在过去的三十年里,学术生物医学研究人员和私营企业之间的合作安排急剧增长,产生了极大地造福社会的医学创新。然而,越来越多的批评矛头指向赞助和开展生物医学研究的私营公司,这让人们对科学的精神本身产生了怀疑。学者和反商业活动人士发起了一场反对行业资助的临床试验的运动,这些试验否认了此类研究的根本商业性质,阻碍了医学进步。这些批评人士指出,在少数不幸和悲惨的案例中,经济利益冲突可能在与研究有关的伤害和死亡中发挥了作用,以便不合理地谴责整个生物医学研究中的利润动机。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Shackling Innovation the Regulation of Industry Supported Clinical Trials
Over the past three decades, collaborative arrangements between academic biomedical researchers and private industry have grown dramatically, resulting in medical innovations that have benefited society greatly. However, a growing chorus of criticism directed at private companies that sponsor and conduct biomedical research casts doubt on the very ethos of science. Academics and anti-business activists have waged a campaign against industry-sponsored clinical trials that denies the fundamentally commercial nature of such research and hinders medical progress. These critics point to a small number of unfortunate and tragic cases in which financial conflicts of interest may have played a role in research-related injuries and deaths in order to unjustifiably condemn the profit motive in biomedical research as a whole.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Who Gets Medication-assisted Treatment for Opioid Use Disorder, and Does It Reduce Overdose Risk? Evidence from the Rhode Island All-payer Claims Database The Architecture Behind the Malpractice Concept Guidelines Tax Evasion and Illicit Cigarettes in California: Part I – Survey Evidence on Current Behavior Regulatory Exclusivity Revision: Working to Achieve Greater Innovation in Approved New Molecular Entities Leviathan in the Commons: Biomedical Data and the State
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1