This Article  • References  • Full text PDF  • Send to a friend  • Save in My Folder  • Save to citation manager  • Permissions  Citing Articles  • Citing articles on HighWire  • Citing articles on Web of Science (27)  • Contact me when this article is cited  Related Content  • Similar articles in this journal  Social Bookmarking   What's this?

Similarities and Differences

Robert J. Levine, MD

Arch Intern Med. 1983;143(6):1229-1231.

	Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text PDF and any section headings.

Informed consent to research is generally perceived as something very different from informed consent to the practice of medicine. At an operational level, this perception is correct. There are major differences that reflect important distinctions between the nature and purpose of research and practice. However, at a more basic level, there is much more similarity than difference, since the fundamental purpose of informed consent is the same in research, practice, or in any other context. In this survey of the similarities and differences between research and practice, I shall write in general terms about the nature of research and practice, or what they are generally thought to be, without addressing the many exceptions to these generalizations.

Informed consent to research is a very formal process.¹ Federal regulations require that the investigator develop a comprehensive account of the "elements of informed consent" for presentation to prospective subjects. In some cases, . . . [Full Text PDF of this Article]

Author Affiliations
From the Department of Internal Medicine, Yale University School of Medicine, New Haven, Conn.

Footnotes
Accepted for publication Sept 16, 1982.

Reprint requests to Department of Medicine, Yale University School of Medicine, Room IE-48 SHM, 333 Cedar St, PO Box 3333, New Haven, CT 06510 (Dr Levine).

CiteULike    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter     What's this?