Comment on Hemming et al.’s ‘Stepped-wedge trials should be classified as research for the purpose of ethical review’

Abstract

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Hemming

Taljaard

Marshall

, et al. Stepped-wedge trials should be classified as research for the purpose of ethical review. Clin Trials 2019; 16(6): 580–588.

King

Gakidou

Imai

, et al. Public policy for the poor? A randomised assessment of the Mexican universal health insurance programme. Lancet 2009; 373(9673): 1447–1454.

Baicker

Taubman

Allen

, et al. The Oregon experiment: effects of Medicaid on clinical outcomes. N Engl J Med 2013; 368(18): 1713–1722.

McKenzie

Stillman

Gibson

. How important is selection? Experimental vs. non-experimental measures of the income gains from migration. J Eur Econ Assoc 2010; 8: 913–945.

Watson

Dixon-Woods

Taylor

, et al. Revising ethical guidance for the evaluation of programmes and interventions not initiated by researchers. J Med Ethics 2020; 46: 26–30.

Schmidtke

Nightingale

Reeves

, et al. Randomised controlled trial of a theory-based intervention to prompt front-line staff to take up the seasonal influenza vaccine. BMJ Qual Saf. Epub ahead of print 5 August 2019. DOI: 10.1136/bmjqs-2019-009775.