Try a new search

Format these results:

Searched for:

in-biosketch:yes

person:caplaa01

Total Results:

1353


Bioethics: Then, Now and Tomorrow [Comment]

Caplan, Arthur
PMID: 39226021
ISSN: 1536-0075
CID: 5687822

Research involving the recently deceased: ethics questions that must be answered

Parent, Brendan; Kates, Olivia S; Arap, Wadih; Caplan, Arthur; Childs, Brian; Dickert, Neal W; Homan, Mary; Kinlaw, Kathy; Lang, Ayannah; Latham, Stephen; Levan, Macey L; Truog, Robert D; Webb, Adam; Root Wolpe, Paul; Pentz, Rebecca D
Research involving recently deceased humans that are physiologically maintained following declaration of death by neurologic criteria-or 'research involving the recently deceased'-can fill a translational research gap while reducing harm to animals and living human subjects. It also creates new challenges for honouring the donor's legacy, respecting the rights of donor loved ones, resource allocation and public health. As this research model gains traction, new empirical ethics questions must be answered to preserve public trust in all forms of tissue donation and in the practice of medicine while respecting the legacy of the deceased and the rights of donor loved ones. This article suggests several topics for immediate investigation to understand the attitudes and experiences of researchers, clinical collaborators, donor loved ones and the public to ensure research involving the recently deceased advances ethically.
PMID: 38071588
ISSN: 1473-4257
CID: 5589392

Requesting an Autopsy of the Dead Donor Rule: Improving, Not Abandoning, the Guiding Rule in Organ Donation [Comment]

Schiff, Tamar; Caplan, Arthur
PMID: 38829594
ISSN: 1536-0075
CID: 5665012

Reopening the 'Window to the Soul'?: The Ethics of Eye Transplantation Now and in the Future [Comment]

Caplan, Arthur
PMID: 38635437
ISSN: 1536-0075
CID: 5734602

The Real Impact of the Alabama Supreme Court Decision in LePage v Center for Reproductive Medicine

Bayefsky, Michelle J; Caplan, Arthur L; Quinn, Gwendolyn P
PMID: 38436997
ISSN: 1538-3598
CID: 5691912

Bioethics' Duty to Conference in Qatar: Reply to Magnus [Editorial]

Jecker, Nancy S; Savulescu, Julian; Caplan, Arthur; Capron, Alexander; McMillan, John; Ghaly, Mohammed; Ortiz Millán, Gustavo; Atuire, Caesar; McMahan, Jeff; Chuan, Voo Teck; Bélisle-Pipon, Jean-Christophe; Viswani, Vina; Ravitsky, Vardit
PMID: 38529964
ISSN: 1536-0075
CID: 5644672

Leaving a Legacy: Allied Health Professionals' Perceptions of Fertility Preservation and Posthumous Reproduction for Adolescent and Young Adults with a Poor Cancer Prognosis

Barrett, Francesca; Sampson, Amani; Campo-Engelstein, Lisa; Caplan, Arthur; Vadaparampil, Susan T; Quinn, Gwendolyn P
PMCID:10877393
PMID: 37294937
ISSN: 2156-535x
CID: 5691012

Standing on the Shoulders of Giant Artificial Intelligence Bots: Artificial Intelligence Can and Therefore Must Now Elevate Equity in Health Professional Education [Editorial]

Chickering, Miriam J; Frank, Erica; Caplan, Arthur L
PMCID:10756954
PMID: 38162400
ISSN: 2773-0654
CID: 5736872

LESSONS FROM THE GENOME

Chapter by: Caplan, Arthur; Kunzler, Nathan
in: The Future of the Brain: Essays by the World's Leading Neuroscientists by
[S.l.] : Princeton University Press, 2024
pp. 194-204
ISBN: 9780691258829
CID: 5716812

Consideration and Disclosure of Group Risks in Genomics and Other Data-Centric Research: Does the Common Rule Need Revision?

Chapman, Carolyn Riley; Quinn, Gwendolyn P; Natri, Heini M; Berrios, Courtney; Dwyer, Patrick; Owens, Kellie; Heraty, Síofra; Caplan, Arthur L
Harms and risks to groups and third-parties can be significant in the context of research, particularly in data-centric studies involving genomic, artificial intelligence, and/or machine learning technologies. This article explores whether and how United States federal regulations should be adapted to better align with current ethical thinking and protect group interests. Three aspects of the Common Rule deserve attention and reconsideration with respect to group interests: institutional review board (IRB) assessment of the risks/benefits of research; disclosure requirements in the informed consent process; and criteria for waivers of informed consent. In accordance with respect for persons and communities, investigators and IRBs should systematically consider potential group harm when designing and reviewing protocols, respectively. Research participants should be informed about any potential group harm in the consent process. We call for additional public discussion, empirical research, and normative analysis on these issues to determine the right regulatory and policy path forward.
PMID: 38010648
ISSN: 1536-0075
CID: 5617612