儿童用药的伦理与科学。

Q3 Psychology Ethical Human Psychology and Psychiatry Pub Date : 2004-01-01
Jacqueline A Sparks, Barry L Duncan
{"title":"儿童用药的伦理与科学。","authors":"Jacqueline A Sparks,&nbsp;Barry L Duncan","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Prescriptions for psychiatric drugs to children and adolescents have skyrocketed in the past 10 years. This article presents evidence that the superior effectiveness of stimulants and antidepressants is largely a presumption based on an empirical house of cards, driven by an industry that has no conscience about the implications of its ever growing, and disturbingly younger, list of consumers. Recognizing that most mental health professionals do not have the time, and sometimes feel ill-equipped to explore the controversy regarding pharmacological treatment of children, this article discusses the four fatal flaws of drug studies to enable critical examination of research addressing the drugging of children. The four flaws are illustrated by the Emslie studies of Prozac and children, which offer not only a strident example of marketing masquerading as science, but also, given the recent FDA approval of Prozac for children, a brutal reminder of the danger inherent in not knowing how to distinguish science from science fiction. The authors argue that an ethical path requires the challenge of the automatic medical response to medicate children, with an accompanying demand for untainted science and balanced information to inform critical decisions by child caretakers.</p>","PeriodicalId":39734,"journal":{"name":"Ethical Human Psychology and Psychiatry","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2004-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The ethics and science of medicating children.\",\"authors\":\"Jacqueline A Sparks,&nbsp;Barry L Duncan\",\"doi\":\"\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Prescriptions for psychiatric drugs to children and adolescents have skyrocketed in the past 10 years. This article presents evidence that the superior effectiveness of stimulants and antidepressants is largely a presumption based on an empirical house of cards, driven by an industry that has no conscience about the implications of its ever growing, and disturbingly younger, list of consumers. Recognizing that most mental health professionals do not have the time, and sometimes feel ill-equipped to explore the controversy regarding pharmacological treatment of children, this article discusses the four fatal flaws of drug studies to enable critical examination of research addressing the drugging of children. The four flaws are illustrated by the Emslie studies of Prozac and children, which offer not only a strident example of marketing masquerading as science, but also, given the recent FDA approval of Prozac for children, a brutal reminder of the danger inherent in not knowing how to distinguish science from science fiction. The authors argue that an ethical path requires the challenge of the automatic medical response to medicate children, with an accompanying demand for untainted science and balanced information to inform critical decisions by child caretakers.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":39734,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Ethical Human Psychology and Psychiatry\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2004-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Ethical Human Psychology and Psychiatry\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"Psychology\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Ethical Human Psychology and Psychiatry","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Psychology","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

在过去的10年里,儿童和青少年的精神病药物处方急剧增加。这篇文章提供的证据表明,兴奋剂和抗抑郁药的优越疗效在很大程度上是一种基于经验的假设,是由一个对其不断增长的、令人不安的年轻消费者名单的影响毫无良心的行业所推动的。认识到大多数心理健康专业人员没有时间,有时觉得自己没有能力去探索关于儿童药物治疗的争议,本文讨论了药物研究的四个致命缺陷,以便对解决儿童药物问题的研究进行批判性检查。埃姆斯利对百忧解和儿童的研究说明了这四个缺陷,这不仅是一个以科学为幌子进行营销的尖锐例子,而且,鉴于美国食品药品监督管理局(FDA)最近批准了儿童用百忧解,这也残酷地提醒人们,不知道如何区分科学和科幻小说的内在危险。这组作者认为,一条道德道路需要挑战对儿童进行药物治疗的自动医疗反应,同时要求提供无污染的科学和平衡的信息,以便为儿童看护人的关键决策提供信息。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
The ethics and science of medicating children.

Prescriptions for psychiatric drugs to children and adolescents have skyrocketed in the past 10 years. This article presents evidence that the superior effectiveness of stimulants and antidepressants is largely a presumption based on an empirical house of cards, driven by an industry that has no conscience about the implications of its ever growing, and disturbingly younger, list of consumers. Recognizing that most mental health professionals do not have the time, and sometimes feel ill-equipped to explore the controversy regarding pharmacological treatment of children, this article discusses the four fatal flaws of drug studies to enable critical examination of research addressing the drugging of children. The four flaws are illustrated by the Emslie studies of Prozac and children, which offer not only a strident example of marketing masquerading as science, but also, given the recent FDA approval of Prozac for children, a brutal reminder of the danger inherent in not knowing how to distinguish science from science fiction. The authors argue that an ethical path requires the challenge of the automatic medical response to medicate children, with an accompanying demand for untainted science and balanced information to inform critical decisions by child caretakers.

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
Ethical Human Psychology and Psychiatry
Ethical Human Psychology and Psychiatry Psychology-Clinical Psychology
CiteScore
2.00
自引率
0.00%
发文量
8
期刊介绍: Visit Ethical Human Psychology and Psychiatry Online on IngentaConnect to view tables of contents or to subscribe. Ethical Human Psychology and Psychiatry (EHPP) is a peer-reviewed journal that publishes original research reports, reviews, essays, book reviews, commentaries, and case reports examining all the ramifications of the idea that emotional distress is due to an underlying organic disease that is best treated with pharmacological therapy. This oversimplified view of human nature permeates virtually every area of our society including medicine, business, law, education, politics, and the media. Thus, we welcome submissions from a broad range of specialties. EHPP is the official publication of the International Center for the Study of Psychiatry and Psychology (ICSPP).
期刊最新文献
Redefining Anorexia Nervosa and Its Causes to Rethink Its Care The Neuroscientist’s Illusion An Antidote to the Pathologizing of Grief: Applying the Power–Threat–Meaning Framework Addressing the Quandary of Chronic Pain: Learning From Phenomenological Research Truth-Telling, Aging, and Healing From Institutional Psychiatric Violence: A Life Story and Mad Studies Perspective
×
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