Declining enrolment in a clinical trial and injurious misconceptions: is there a flipside to the therapeutic misconception?

Claire Snowdon ORCID logo; Diana Elbourne ORCID logo; JoGarcia; (2007) Declining enrolment in a clinical trial and injurious misconceptions: is there a flipside to the therapeutic misconception? Clin Ethics, 2 (4). pp. 193-200. DOI: 10.1258/147775007783560193
Copy

<jats:p> The term 'therapeutic misconception' (TM) was introduced in 1982 to conceptualize how some psychiatry trial participants perceived and interpreted their involvement in research. TM has since been identified in many settings and is a major component in research ethics discussions. A qualitative study included a subgroup of interviews with five parents (two couples, one mother) who declined to enrol their baby in a neonatal trial. Analysis suggested the possibility of a counterpart to TM which, given the original terminology, we term the 'injurious misconception' (IM). While TM is closely linked to the elision of care and research, and involves an over-stated sense of benefit and protection, IM may be a product of a particularly keen and discomforting sense of distinctions between care and research and a correspondingly over-stated sense of risk and threat. </jats:p>


Full text not available from this repository.

Explore Further

Read more research from the creator(s):

Find work associated with the faculties and division(s):

Find work associated with the research centre(s):

Find work from this publication: