Doing research on the ethics of doing research.docVIP

Available online /content/11/1/111 Commentary Doing research on the ethics of doing research Robert D Truog1,2 1Harvard Medical School, Department of Social Medicine, Division of Medical Ethics, 651 Huntington Ave, Boston, MA 02115, USA 2Childrens Hospital Boston, Department of Anesthesiology, Division of Critical Care Mediciine, 300 Longwood Ave, Boston, MA 02115, USA Corresponding author: Robert D Truog, Robert.Truog@ Published: 19 February 2007 Critical Care 2007, 11:111 (doi:10.1186/cc5684) This article is online at /content/11/1/111 ? 2007 BioMed Central Ltd See related research by Chenaud et al., /content/10/6/R170 Abstract make sure that participants are continually reminded of the purposes and risks of a study and of their right to withdraw at any time. In the previous issue of Critical Care Chenaud and colleagues found that most intensive care unit patients who had given informed consent for their participation in a clinical trial could not recall either the purpose of the trial or its related risks several days later. These findings should remind us that informed consent is a process, not an event, but they should not be interpreted to mean that recall is, of itself, a useful criterion for evaluating either the validity or the quality of the informed consent process. On an entirely separate note, the decision of the authors not to obtain informed consent for this study itself raises interesting questions about the ethics of doing research on the ethics of doing research. However, does this study call into question the validity of the informed consent process itself? The authors remind us of the three mandatory conditions for informed consent for research, as outlined in the Belmont report [7]: communi- cation of information about the purposes and procedures involved in the trial, including its associated risks and benefits; ensur