Pandemic vaccine trials
Expedite, but don’t rush
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 21787669 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Angus Dawson (0000-0002-8533-4987, The University of Sydney, corresponding author) |
| Year | 2020 |
| Volume | 16 |
| Issue | 3-4 |
| Pages | 1-12 |
| Publication date | 2020-07-01 |
| Peer Reviewed | Yes |
| Open Access | Yes |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | Research Ethics (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 1747-0161 • E-ISSN: 2047-6094 |
| Publisher | SAGE Publications (PUBLISHER • US) |
| DOI | 10.1177/1747016120943730 |
| OpenAlex | W3044977448 |
| Language | EN |
| Citations received | 1 |
| References cited | 17 |
It has been proposed that the urgency of having a vaccine as a response to SARS-CoV-2 is so great, given the potential health, economic and social benefits that we should override the established steps in the research development process. In this article I argue that whilst there are some opportunities to expedite the production of a vaccine, it is a mistake to rush the research. We should retain the existing structures represented by clear and separate ‘phasing’ of trials. I offer three reasons for this view: the existing phases of trials is morally significant; rushing fails to appropriately weigh all of the relevant risks and benefits and consent is not sufficient for the justification of additional risk. Vaccines have played a central role in global health improvements and we should not endanger such achievements for an apparent short-term gain in response to a pandemic such as SARS-CoV-2
2019-20 coronavirus outbreak · Business · Mistake · Outbreak · Pandemic · Political science · Public relations · Law · Medicine · SARS-CoV-2 and COVID-19 Research · Vaccine Coverage and Hesitancy · Viral Infections and Outbreaks Research · Virology
| Unique citing works | 1 |
|---|---|
| Citations per year | 0,17 |
| Citation span | 2020 - 2020 (1) |
| Citation velocity | historical |
| Highly cited | No |
| Citation types | Neutral: 1 |