It is always difficult to deal with patients and their data as the code of ethics should be followed. However, the research is one of the main guarantees of successful treatment in the future. To make sure that the research corresponds to the specific rules and ethical norms, it is important to get to know some particular legislation in the sphere. There is the Nuremberg Code which regulates specific behavior of researchers in care of human beings who are selected as subjects. Ten standards are displayed in the document. Thus, the randomized research must be voluntary, the research should be directed at the good of society, background knowledge should be used for justifying the reasons of the experiment, suffering and injuring is inadmissible. It is important to avoid experiment conduction in case the death may occur, as well as the risks should be evaluated and never exceed those defined by the importance of the study. Subjects should be informed about the research peculiarity and demand of professional performance of the study (Hutton, 2001).
Devoted to Chlamydia, our community intervention trial research should put data security as a priority. Before getting down to research, we are to consider the benefits of the research compared to the harm which may be caused to the subject. Annual monitoring and educational programs cannot subject objects to any injury, thus our research is safe and corresponds to the norms of ethics. In other words, the benefits in out community intervention trial stand in balance with the risks (Weijer, 2011). To understand whether the trial is ethical or not the question about clinical equipoise should be asked. Understanding the importance of clinical equipoise, it “can be seen in its prominent appearance in the research ethics literature and in policies and guidelines governing the protection of human subjects in research” (Binik, 2011, p. 121). Clinical equipoise usually involves much debate and discussions which reduce the risks of unethical research to minimum.
We are going to use the cluster RCT for research for many reasons. First, the society is divided into groups due to different characteristic features, we avoid concerns about individual non-inclusion, we apply our research results to the whole society, thus the generalization of the outcome is important, and the mass effectiveness of the research is important not only to the small group of people but to the whole society (Osrin et al, 2009). Our community intervention trial research aimed at identifying Chlamydia infected among ethnic group ages 14-18 in Miami Dade County corresponds to all the requirements directed at conducting ethical research. The only risk we should care for is the information security and subjects voluntary desire to take part in the experiment. Each participant should be informed about the research conduction, the time and their obligations. While community randomized trial, the subjects should be informed about their responsibility before the researchers.
Therefore, it may be concluded that we are going to conduct a research among randomly selected volunteers without any harm to death and injury, with personal data security using background knowledge and highly trained professional assistance. All other ethical norms and requirements are followed. Having some risk with data security, much attention is going to be paid to reduce this problem to minimum. Moreover, being chosen for the experiment subjects are limited in some particular situations, like the obligation for be monitored, that may also cause some dissatisfaction.
Reference List
Binik, A. et al. (2011). Does clinical equipment apply to cluster randomized trials in health research? Trials, 12(1), 118-128.
Hutton, J. L. (2001). Are distinctive ethical principles required for cluster randomized controlled trials? Statistics in Medicine, 20, 473-488.
Osrin, D., Azad, K., Fernandez, A., Manandhar, D., Mwansambo, C., Tripathy, P., & Costello, A. (2009). Ethical challenges in cluster randomized controlled trials: experiences from public health interventions in Africa and Asia. Bulletin Of The World Health Organization, 87(10), 772-779.
Weijer, C. et al. (2011). Ethical issues posed by cluster randomized trials in health research. Trials, 12(1), 100-110.