Response to Merz

dc.contributor.authorAl, Pepijn
dc.contributor.authorBrehaut, Jamie
dc.contributor.authorWeijer, Charles
dc.date.accessioned2023-10-10T03:16:39Z
dc.date.available2023-10-10T03:16:39Z
dc.date.issued2023-10-06
dc.date.updated2023-10-10T03:16:39Z
dc.description.abstractAbstract Jon Merz raises two objections to our article on the ethics of behavioral influences in trial recruitment. In this response, we defend our article against these objections. We argue that Merz’s critique rests on a misunderstanding of our article, defend the daily life standard as a guardrail for leveraging cognitive biases, and argue that rejecting all behavioral influences is not a helpful nor a sustainable answer to their increasing use in trial recruitment.
dc.identifier.citationTrials. 2023 Oct 06;24(1):649
dc.identifier.urihttps://doi.org/10.1186/s13063-023-07693-3
dc.identifier.urihttps://doi.org/10.20381/ruor-29734
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10393/45529
dc.language.rfc3066en
dc.rights.holderBioMed Central Ltd., part of Springer Nature
dc.titleResponse to Merz

Fichiers

Trousse originale

Voici les éléments 1 - 1 sur 1
En cours de chargement...
Vignette d'image
Nom:
13063_2023_Article_7693.pdf
Taille:
723.35 KB
Format:
Adobe Portable Document Format

Trousse de licence

Voici les éléments 1 - 1 sur 1
En cours de chargement...
Vignette d'image
Nom:
license.txt
Taille:
0 B
Format:
Item-specific license agreed upon to submission
Description: