PDF(Pubmed)
Abstract：
This narrative review aims to describe current practice and ongoing discussions in the academic literature regarding ethics and health research priority setting. It begins with some preliminary distinctions regarding types of research priority setting. It then gives some background on current practice with respect to formal research priority setting exercises, including summaries of The Ad Hoc Committee on Health Research method, the Child Health and Nutrition Research Initiative (CHNRI) method, the Combined Approach Matrix (CAM), the Delphi method, the Essential National Health Research (ENHR) strategy for priority setting, and the James Lind Alliance (JLA) framework. The majority of the paper reports the results of a literature review covering specifically ethical issues under the thematic headings of process criteria, substantive criteria, global justice, the obligations of specific actors, and research topics. It closes with some summary thoughts about apparent gaps and directions for future investigation.
More health research is needed to develop new treatment and prevention options for many diseases. But there are limited resources available to support health research. This means that difficult decisions must be made about how to allocate those resources among competing important projects. Making these decisions is called priority setting. Dr. Joseph Millum reviewed what has been published on the ethics of health research priority setting. First, he compared different methods that have already been developed to help organizations and governments set priorities. Second, he identified themes in the current discussions about ethics and priority setting. Some important themes included: how stakeholders should be included in priority setting exercises; what would be a fair allocation of research resources; global disparities in health research; and how different types of funder should think about their obligations. The results of this review will inform guidance from the World Health Organization on how to incorporate ethics into health research priority setting.
More health research is needed to develop new treatment and prevention options for many diseases. But there are limited resources available to support health research. This means that difficult decisions must be made about how to allocate those resources among competing important projects. Making these decisions is called priority setting. Dr. Joseph Millum reviewed what has been published on the ethics of health research priority setting. First, he compared different methods that have already been developed to help organizations and governments set priorities. Second, he identified themes in the current discussions about ethics and priority setting. Some important themes included: how stakeholders should be included in priority setting exercises; what would be a fair allocation of research resources; global disparities in health research; and how different types of funder should think about their obligations. The results of this review will inform guidance from the World Health Organization on how to incorporate ethics into health research priority setting.
摘要：
这篇叙述性评论旨在描述学术文献中有关道德和健康研究优先级设置的当前实践和正在进行的讨论。首先是关于研究优先级设置类型的一些初步区别。然后给出了一些关于正式研究优先级设置练习的当前实践的背景，包括卫生研究方法特设委员会的摘要，儿童健康与营养研究倡议(CHNRI)方法，组合方法矩阵(CAM)，德尔菲法，基本国家健康研究(ENHR)优先事项设定战略，和詹姆斯·林德联盟（JLA）框架。该论文的大部分报告了文献综述的结果，具体涵盖了过程标准主题标题下的道德问题，实质性标准，全球正义,特定行为者的义务，和研究课题。它以一些关于明显差距和未来调查方向的总结思考结束。
需要更多的健康研究来为许多疾病开发新的治疗和预防方案。但是支持健康研究的资源有限。这意味着必须就如何在相互竞争的重要项目中分配这些资源做出艰难的决定。做出这些决定称为优先级设置。JosephMillum博士回顾了已发表的关于健康研究优先事项设定的伦理学的内容。首先,他比较了已经开发的帮助组织和政府确定优先事项的不同方法。第二,他确定了当前有关道德和优先级设置的讨论中的主题。一些重要主题包括：应如何将利益攸关方纳入确定优先事项的工作；什么是公平分配研究资源；卫生研究的全球差异；以及不同类型的资助者应如何考虑其义务。这项审查的结果将为世界卫生组织提供有关如何将伦理学纳入健康研究重点设置的指导。
需要更多的健康研究来为许多疾病开发新的治疗和预防方案。但是支持健康研究的资源有限。这意味着必须就如何在相互竞争的重要项目中分配这些资源做出艰难的决定。做出这些决定称为优先级设置。JosephMillum博士回顾了已发表的关于健康研究优先事项设定的伦理学的内容。首先,他比较了已经开发的帮助组织和政府确定优先事项的不同方法。第二,他确定了当前有关道德和优先级设置的讨论中的主题。一些重要主题包括：应如何将利益攸关方纳入确定优先事项的工作；什么是公平分配研究资源；卫生研究的全球差异；以及不同类型的资助者应如何考虑其义务。这项审查的结果将为世界卫生组织提供有关如何将伦理学纳入健康研究重点设置的指导。
