Question

Case: Charles was put in charge of a research study which required 40 participants who were between the ages of 55-75, had a diagnosis of diabetes, and a recent (less than 4 weeks) diagnosis of diabetic neuropathy. The treatment required a short duration from diagnosis because it required certain anatomical structures still be intact. Currently, 39 participants had agreed to the trial and met all the criteria. Two of the participants were diagnosed with diabetic neuropathy 3 weeks and 6 days ago, meaning that if Charles did not find the final participant today, he would need to find 3 more tomorrow. By the end of the week, all participants would be out of the diagnosis range. With only 2 hours left in the day, Charles received a text from Lorna, an ER nurse who just admitted a patient with complications from diabetes, and who also had a diagnosis of diabetic neuropathy. As Charles carefully looked at the patient chart, it was clear that the patient did have a diagnosis of diabetic neuropathy, but no date of diagnosis could be found. The diagnosing physician was not on staff at the hospital and his office was closed. Charles realized it was a long shot that the doctor would be able to recall the exact date of the diagnosis, but called the physician’s after-hours line just in case. Ruth, the ER physician, was a good friend of Charles and said that she thought the patient was a good candidate for the study. “Charles, there is a blank space next to the diagnosis date and I don’t mind filling one in. This guy probably does have a recent diagnosis based on my examination. I can’t say for sure that it is within four weeks, but it’s probably close.” Ruth and Charles discuss the study with the patient, who readily agrees to participate. When asked about the date of his neuropathy diagnosis, the patient reported he was unsure, but thought it was within the last month or two. Ruth handed the patient the consent form and told the patient that she would just put in a date that would allow the patient access to the new treatment. Charles felt uneasy, but accepted the form from Ruth, and notified the research team that he had acquired all the participants needed. After all, he was thinking more about the greater good for these participants, and possibly countless others who would benefit from the treatment. What do you think of Charles decision?

Answer 1

Answer: Charles decision at this point is favourable as the major aim was to bring out enhanced outcomes and results. The participants in the research can easily withdraw from the research process whenever they want as it it the ethical principle of the research. So the Charles decision should be considered for the more exposure and research process.