Clinical equipoise: Why still the gold standard for randomized clinical trials?

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleResearchpeer review

Authors

  • Charlemagne Asonganyi Folefac
  • Hugh Desmond

External Research Organisations

  • KU Leuven
  • Aarhus University
  • University of Antwerp (UAntwerpen)
  • Centre national de la recherche scientifique (CNRS)
View graph of relations

Details

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)102-112
Number of pages11
JournalClinical Ethics
Volume19
Issue number1
Early online date25 Sept 2022
Publication statusPublished - Mar 2024
Externally publishedYes

Abstract

The principle of clinical equipoise has been variously characterized by ethicists and clinicians as fundamentally flawed, a myth, and even a moral balm. Yet, the principle continues to be treated as the de facto gold standard for conducting randomized control trials in an ethical manner. Why do we hold on to clinical equipoise, despite its shortcomings being widely known and well-advertised? This paper reviews the most important arguments criticizing clinical equipoise as well as what the most prominent proposed alternatives are. In the process, it evaluates the justification for continuing to use clinical equipoise as the gold standard for randomized control trials.

Keywords

    Clinical equipoise, clinical trials, informed consent, research ethics

ASJC Scopus subject areas

Cite this

Clinical equipoise: Why still the gold standard for randomized clinical trials? / Asonganyi Folefac, Charlemagne; Desmond, Hugh.
In: Clinical Ethics, Vol. 19, No. 1, 03.2024, p. 102-112.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleResearchpeer review

Asonganyi Folefac, C & Desmond, H 2024, 'Clinical equipoise: Why still the gold standard for randomized clinical trials?', Clinical Ethics, vol. 19, no. 1, pp. 102-112. https://doi.org/10.1177/14777509221121107
Asonganyi Folefac C, Desmond H. Clinical equipoise: Why still the gold standard for randomized clinical trials? Clinical Ethics. 2024 Mar;19(1):102-112. Epub 2022 Sept 25. doi: 10.1177/14777509221121107
Asonganyi Folefac, Charlemagne ; Desmond, Hugh. / Clinical equipoise : Why still the gold standard for randomized clinical trials?. In: Clinical Ethics. 2024 ; Vol. 19, No. 1. pp. 102-112.
Download
@article{5765f55bfd3a40c2a200e98c273a69ed,
title = "Clinical equipoise: Why still the gold standard for randomized clinical trials?",
abstract = "The principle of clinical equipoise has been variously characterized by ethicists and clinicians as fundamentally flawed, a myth, and even a moral balm. Yet, the principle continues to be treated as the de facto gold standard for conducting randomized control trials in an ethical manner. Why do we hold on to clinical equipoise, despite its shortcomings being widely known and well-advertised? This paper reviews the most important arguments criticizing clinical equipoise as well as what the most prominent proposed alternatives are. In the process, it evaluates the justification for continuing to use clinical equipoise as the gold standard for randomized control trials.",
keywords = "Clinical equipoise, clinical trials, informed consent, research ethics",
author = "{Asonganyi Folefac}, Charlemagne and Hugh Desmond",
note = "Funding Information: The authors disclosed receipt of the following financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: Hugh Desmond's work on this article was supported by the Horizon 2020 Framework Programme (grant number 741782). ",
year = "2024",
month = mar,
doi = "10.1177/14777509221121107",
language = "English",
volume = "19",
pages = "102--112",
number = "1",

}

Download

TY - JOUR

T1 - Clinical equipoise

T2 - Why still the gold standard for randomized clinical trials?

AU - Asonganyi Folefac, Charlemagne

AU - Desmond, Hugh

N1 - Funding Information: The authors disclosed receipt of the following financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: Hugh Desmond's work on this article was supported by the Horizon 2020 Framework Programme (grant number 741782).

PY - 2024/3

Y1 - 2024/3

N2 - The principle of clinical equipoise has been variously characterized by ethicists and clinicians as fundamentally flawed, a myth, and even a moral balm. Yet, the principle continues to be treated as the de facto gold standard for conducting randomized control trials in an ethical manner. Why do we hold on to clinical equipoise, despite its shortcomings being widely known and well-advertised? This paper reviews the most important arguments criticizing clinical equipoise as well as what the most prominent proposed alternatives are. In the process, it evaluates the justification for continuing to use clinical equipoise as the gold standard for randomized control trials.

AB - The principle of clinical equipoise has been variously characterized by ethicists and clinicians as fundamentally flawed, a myth, and even a moral balm. Yet, the principle continues to be treated as the de facto gold standard for conducting randomized control trials in an ethical manner. Why do we hold on to clinical equipoise, despite its shortcomings being widely known and well-advertised? This paper reviews the most important arguments criticizing clinical equipoise as well as what the most prominent proposed alternatives are. In the process, it evaluates the justification for continuing to use clinical equipoise as the gold standard for randomized control trials.

KW - Clinical equipoise

KW - clinical trials

KW - informed consent

KW - research ethics

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85139155068&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1177/14777509221121107

DO - 10.1177/14777509221121107

M3 - Article

AN - SCOPUS:85139155068

VL - 19

SP - 102

EP - 112

JO - Clinical Ethics

JF - Clinical Ethics

SN - 1477-7509

IS - 1

ER -