Article Text
Abstract
Ethics has been identified as a central reason for choosing the stepped wedge trial over other kinds of trial designs. The potential advantage of the stepped wedge design is that it provides all arms of the trial with the active intervention over the course of the study. Some groups receive it later than others, but the study intervention is not withheld from any group. This feature of the stepped wedge design seems particularly ethically advantageous in two instances: (1) when the study intervention appears especially likely to be effective and (2) when the consequences of not receiving the intervention may be dire. But despite an increase in the use of the stepped wedge design and appeals to its ethical superiority as the motivation for its selection, there has been limited attention to the stepped wedge trial in the ethics literature. In the following, I examine whether there are persuasive ethical reasons to prefer or to require a stepped wedge trial. I argue that while the stepped wedge design is ethically permissible, it is not morally superior to other kinds of trials. To this end, I examine the ethical justification for providing, withholding, and delaying interventions in research.
- research ethics
- clinical trials
- ethics
Statistics from Altmetric.com
Footnotes
Contributors I am the sole author of this submission.
Funding The authors have not declared a specific grant for this research from any funding agency in the public, commercial or not-for-profit sectors.
Competing interests None declared.
Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; externally peer reviewed.
Patient consent for publication Not required.
Other content recommended for you
- Deciphering assumptions about stepped wedge designs: the case of Ebola vaccine research
- The stepped wedge cluster randomised trial: rationale, design, analysis, and reporting
- Cutting edge or blunt instrument: how to decide if a stepped wedge design is right for you
- An epistemology of patient safety research: a framework for study design and interpretation. Part 2. Study design
- Effects of emergency obstetric care training on maternal and perinatal outcomes: a stepped wedge cluster randomised trial in South Africa
- Assessing the impact of a Carer Support Needs Assessment Tool (CSNAT) intervention in palliative home care: a stepped wedge cluster trial
- Evaluating improvement interventions using routine data to support a learning health system: research design, data access, analysis and reporting
- Ottawa Statement does not impede randomised evaluation of government health programmes
- Vaccine testing for emerging infections: the case for individual randomisation
- A stepped wedge, cluster controlled trial of an intervention to improve safety and quality on medical wards: the HEADS-UP study protocol