Conflicto de interés en investigación biomédica

  • Pinto-Pardo N
N/ACitations
Citations of this article
77Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

Man is confronted daily with situations he needs to weigh on to determine what decisions to make. These crossroads define a conflict of interest where a situation, suit or action, which should be determined by a primary value established by professional or ethical reasons, can be influenced or appear biased to obtain a secondary benefit. In biomedical research it is becoming more and more feasible to deal with conflicts of interest that result from scientific and technological advances. It is preponderant to understand what they are, what types of conflicts can be generated, and how these can challenge the quality and accuracy of the results obtained in the eye of the public opinion, especially when economic or personal interest gained are being exposed by third parties. It is necessary to set up mechanisms to control any type of conflict of interest before executing a research protocol, should any exist. These mechanisms could include: public declarations, forms improved and adapted to the community, support units to research ethics committees, or the earnings report. In conclusion, we can say that although new mechanisms or ways of managing conflicts of interest for the biomedical research are being generated, the researcher's conscience will always be the virtue based on its own moral and ethical principles that should govern his /her actions throughout the time they live out their vocation, towards offering or providing a good service to other beings and the society in which they participate.

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Pinto-Pardo, N. (2014). Conflicto de interés en investigación biomédica. Persona y Bioética, 18(2), 158–169. https://doi.org/10.5294/pebi.2014.18.2.6

Readers over time

‘15‘16‘17‘18‘19‘20‘21‘22‘23‘2406121824

Readers' Seniority

Tooltip

PhD / Post grad / Masters / Doc 18

72%

Researcher 4

16%

Professor / Associate Prof. 2

8%

Lecturer / Post doc 1

4%

Readers' Discipline

Tooltip

Medicine and Dentistry 13

50%

Nursing and Health Professions 7

27%

Social Sciences 3

12%

Engineering 3

12%

Article Metrics

Tooltip
Social Media
Shares, Likes & Comments: 1

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free
0