Position statement on ethics, equipoise and research on charged particle radiation therapy
The use of charged-particle radiation therapy (CPRT) is an increasingly important development in the treatment of cancer. One of the most pressing controversies about the use of this technology is whether randomised controlled trials are required before this form of treatment can be considered to be...
| Главные авторы: | , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , |
|---|---|
| Формат: | Journal article |
| Язык: | English |
| Опубликовано: |
BMJ Publishing Group
2014
|
| _version_ | 1826300790658039808 |
|---|---|
| author | Sheehan, M Timlin, C Peach, K Binik, A Puthenparampil, W Lodge, M Kehoe, S Brada, M Burnet, N Clarke, S Crellin, A Dunn, M Fossati, P Harris, S Hocken, M Hope, T Ives, J Kamada, T London, A Miller, R Parker, M Pijls-Johannesma, M Savulescu, J Short, S Skene, L |
| author_facet | Sheehan, M Timlin, C Peach, K Binik, A Puthenparampil, W Lodge, M Kehoe, S Brada, M Burnet, N Clarke, S Crellin, A Dunn, M Fossati, P Harris, S Hocken, M Hope, T Ives, J Kamada, T London, A Miller, R Parker, M Pijls-Johannesma, M Savulescu, J Short, S Skene, L |
| author_sort | Sheehan, M |
| collection | OXFORD |
| description | The use of charged-particle radiation therapy (CPRT) is an increasingly important development in the treatment of cancer. One of the most pressing controversies about the use of this technology is whether randomised controlled trials are required before this form of treatment can be considered to be the treatment of choice for a wide range of indications. Equipoise is the key ethical concept in determining which research studies are justied. However, there is a good deal of disagreement about how this concept is best understood and applied in the specic case of CPRT. This report is a position statement on these controversies that arises out of a workshop held at Wolfson College, Oxford in August 2011. The workshop brought together international leaders in the relevant elds (radiation oncology, medical physics, radiobiology, research ethics and methodology), including proponents on both sides of the debate, in order to make signicant progress on the ethical issues associated with CPRT research. This position statement provides an ethical platform for future research and should enable further work to be done in developing international coordinated programmes of research. |
| first_indexed | 2024-03-07T05:22:31Z |
| format | Journal article |
| id | oxford-uuid:df67b6ff-99bf-49ee-ab99-2fef4d1aba04 |
| institution | University of Oxford |
| language | English |
| last_indexed | 2024-03-07T05:22:31Z |
| publishDate | 2014 |
| publisher | BMJ Publishing Group |
| record_format | dspace |
| spelling | oxford-uuid:df67b6ff-99bf-49ee-ab99-2fef4d1aba042022-03-27T09:39:14ZPosition statement on ethics, equipoise and research on charged particle radiation therapyJournal articlehttp://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_dcae04bcuuid:df67b6ff-99bf-49ee-ab99-2fef4d1aba04EnglishSymplectic Elements at OxfordBMJ Publishing Group2014Sheehan, MTimlin, CPeach, KBinik, APuthenparampil, WLodge, MKehoe, SBrada, MBurnet, NClarke, SCrellin, ADunn, MFossati, PHarris, SHocken, MHope, TIves, JKamada, TLondon, AMiller, RParker, MPijls-Johannesma, MSavulescu, JShort, SSkene, LThe use of charged-particle radiation therapy (CPRT) is an increasingly important development in the treatment of cancer. One of the most pressing controversies about the use of this technology is whether randomised controlled trials are required before this form of treatment can be considered to be the treatment of choice for a wide range of indications. Equipoise is the key ethical concept in determining which research studies are justied. However, there is a good deal of disagreement about how this concept is best understood and applied in the specic case of CPRT. This report is a position statement on these controversies that arises out of a workshop held at Wolfson College, Oxford in August 2011. The workshop brought together international leaders in the relevant elds (radiation oncology, medical physics, radiobiology, research ethics and methodology), including proponents on both sides of the debate, in order to make signicant progress on the ethical issues associated with CPRT research. This position statement provides an ethical platform for future research and should enable further work to be done in developing international coordinated programmes of research. |
| spellingShingle | Sheehan, M Timlin, C Peach, K Binik, A Puthenparampil, W Lodge, M Kehoe, S Brada, M Burnet, N Clarke, S Crellin, A Dunn, M Fossati, P Harris, S Hocken, M Hope, T Ives, J Kamada, T London, A Miller, R Parker, M Pijls-Johannesma, M Savulescu, J Short, S Skene, L Position statement on ethics, equipoise and research on charged particle radiation therapy |
| title | Position statement on ethics, equipoise and research on charged particle radiation therapy |
| title_full | Position statement on ethics, equipoise and research on charged particle radiation therapy |
| title_fullStr | Position statement on ethics, equipoise and research on charged particle radiation therapy |
| title_full_unstemmed | Position statement on ethics, equipoise and research on charged particle radiation therapy |
| title_short | Position statement on ethics, equipoise and research on charged particle radiation therapy |
| title_sort | position statement on ethics equipoise and research on charged particle radiation therapy |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT sheehanm positionstatementonethicsequipoiseandresearchonchargedparticleradiationtherapy AT timlinc positionstatementonethicsequipoiseandresearchonchargedparticleradiationtherapy AT peachk positionstatementonethicsequipoiseandresearchonchargedparticleradiationtherapy AT binika positionstatementonethicsequipoiseandresearchonchargedparticleradiationtherapy AT puthenparampilw positionstatementonethicsequipoiseandresearchonchargedparticleradiationtherapy AT lodgem positionstatementonethicsequipoiseandresearchonchargedparticleradiationtherapy AT kehoes positionstatementonethicsequipoiseandresearchonchargedparticleradiationtherapy AT bradam positionstatementonethicsequipoiseandresearchonchargedparticleradiationtherapy AT burnetn positionstatementonethicsequipoiseandresearchonchargedparticleradiationtherapy AT clarkes positionstatementonethicsequipoiseandresearchonchargedparticleradiationtherapy AT crellina positionstatementonethicsequipoiseandresearchonchargedparticleradiationtherapy AT dunnm positionstatementonethicsequipoiseandresearchonchargedparticleradiationtherapy AT fossatip positionstatementonethicsequipoiseandresearchonchargedparticleradiationtherapy AT harriss positionstatementonethicsequipoiseandresearchonchargedparticleradiationtherapy AT hockenm positionstatementonethicsequipoiseandresearchonchargedparticleradiationtherapy AT hopet positionstatementonethicsequipoiseandresearchonchargedparticleradiationtherapy AT ivesj positionstatementonethicsequipoiseandresearchonchargedparticleradiationtherapy AT kamadat positionstatementonethicsequipoiseandresearchonchargedparticleradiationtherapy AT londona positionstatementonethicsequipoiseandresearchonchargedparticleradiationtherapy AT millerr positionstatementonethicsequipoiseandresearchonchargedparticleradiationtherapy AT parkerm positionstatementonethicsequipoiseandresearchonchargedparticleradiationtherapy AT pijlsjohannesmam positionstatementonethicsequipoiseandresearchonchargedparticleradiationtherapy AT savulescuj positionstatementonethicsequipoiseandresearchonchargedparticleradiationtherapy AT shorts positionstatementonethicsequipoiseandresearchonchargedparticleradiationtherapy AT skenel positionstatementonethicsequipoiseandresearchonchargedparticleradiationtherapy |