0
Does a patient have the right to know they are receiving a placebo?
Wiki User
∙ 14y ago
If you are taking part in a medical or pharmaceutical test, no, you do not. You sign away those rights as a pre-requisite to becoming involved as a test subject. If this was NOT done in a test environment then the doctor would be committing malpractice.
Wiki User
∙ 14y ago
Add your answer:
Earn +20 pts
When scientists study how well medicines work one group of patients receives the medicine while the second group does not why?
It's the only way to discover if the medicine is any good or not. The tests have to be randomised so that each patient does not know whether he is receiving the medicine or just a placebo, and the person administering the dose to that patient must not know if it's the medicine or a placebo.
What type of experiment is it when only the subject does not know it they are receiving the real treatment of the placebo?
If the experimenters know but the subject does not, it's called a "single blind" study. If the placebo is randomized and neither the subject nor the experimenters know which is the placebo, it's called a "double blind" study.
What does it mean when an inmate is in receiving?
I know right
If a doctor leaves a practice does a patient have a right to know why?
YES BECASE THE PATIENT NEEDS TO KNOW
Hospitals in Oahu Hawaii are using Vancomycin routinely as a prophylaxis antibiotic for prevention of infection without informing the patient Is this ethical or a violation of patient rights?
Patients have the right to know in advance what treatments they will be receiving, so I'd say that this is a violation of the patient's rights. Especially since there are possible side effects.
Time it takes for a girl to have a period on placebo?
it should be normal if u know its a placebo but i think u might have the definition of placebo incorrect a placebo is like a sugar pill if it does what they say it will do its just your mind not the pill look it up on wikipedia
I need Very interesting and informative topic for presentation?
Here's one: the placebo paradox. We know now that most alternative therapies work because the patient believes in the treatment and the therapist. This is known to be true of real drugs too. It's a very powerful effect. But once you know that, when you are a cynic who understands the placebo effect, how do you get good treatment. In other words how do you get the benefits of belief when you know it just belief? That's the paradox.
What day of the placebo week should bleeding occur or is it totally random?
It really depends. I know I start on the 2 or 3 placebo pill.
What do you need to know for giving medication?
We need to observe the symptoms of the disease and age of the patient while administering medication. One should also be careful about the expiry date of the medicine before giving it to the patient.
How do you know if you received a placebo medication?
Although it is hard to tell exactly if you are given a placebo or not, here are some ways that may help: Placebo medications usually will not produce side effects. If you are experiencing no side effects while an active medication probably would produce side effects, then you may have received a placebo. If the desired effects are not occurring, then you may have received a placebo.
Who knows which patients are being given the placebo?
Both patients and doctors do not know
What is the benefit of a blind experiment?
Double blind experiments, in the context of medicine, are those in which neither the participants nor the experimenter is aware of who is receiving a treatment and who is receiving a placebo. This removes bias from both the participant and the experimenter. For instance, it has been shown that a participant who believes they are receiving the real treatment will experience a measurable or perceived change, usually an improvement. This effect occurs even if the participant is actually receiving the placebo and is thus known as the placebo effect. Basically the participant believes they have improved and this can sometimes be reflected in an actual change in whatever is being tested for experimentally, e.g. improved health in a drug trial. The other aspect is that if the participant knows they are on the placebo, they will not experience the placebo effect and, for instance in the case of drug trials, may become worse due to a psychological effect, i.e. depression over not receiving a real drug. So, if the participant knows what they are taking, the results for whatever is being experimentally tested for would be distorted, e.g. an over- or underestimation of a drug's potential. As such, participants are not told whether they are receiving the placebo or the treatment. In this way, the placebo effect is either removed, reduced or equivalent across all participants. The second part is that the experimenter also does not know what is being given to a participant. Generally, participants are randomly assigned by computer to either the real drug or the placebo and the experimenter is not allowed to know what the participant is taking until the experiment is over and all measurements have been completed. This avoids the experimenter bias as if they know what a participant is taking, they may be tempted to over- or underestimate the effect. For instance, in a drug trial, an experimenter may see more of an improvement in a treated participant than a placebo participant. This may be an unconscious or conscious action, however, either way it will distort the result. Additionally, an experimenter may accidentally or unconsciously reveal to a participant whether they are on the placebo or drug, which will in turn cause the placebo effect as described earlier. As such, if the experimenter does not know what the participant is taking, they should not suffer from bias nor reveal to the participant. However, this system is not perfect as an experimenter will generally know enough about experiment to be able to work out which participant is taking what, i.e. a drug may exhibit a particular smell or colour or other identifiable characteristic or change in participant. In these cases, the experiment may be handed over to other people to perform, e.g. nurses or doctors, to avoid any chance of bias. The disadvantage to double blind experiments is that they are more costly and difficult to set up, as they will usually require a greater number of people, more rigorous controls. Additionally, the entire experiment must be completed before any conclusions can be made. It may also be impossible to perform some experiments double blind. There may also be other safety, legal and moral constraints as well. For instance, is it morally right to purposely not treat the placebo group of participants who may be seriously or terminally ill? Overall, the double blind experiment is still the "gold standard" in experiments, as it theoretically removes all bias, treats all participants the same whether they are receiving placebo or drug and comes with a negative control.
