CONSENTIMIENTO INFORMADO COMO CRITERIO DE INCLUSIÓN. ¿CONFUSIÓN CONCEPTUAL, MANIPULACIÓN, DISCRIMINACIÓN O COERCIÓN?
Persona y Bioética, ISSN: 0123-3122, Vol: 20, Issue: 2, Page: 244-256
2016
- 1Citations
- 3,509Usage
- 68Captures
Metric Options: CountsSelecting the 1-year or 3-year option will change the metrics count to percentiles, illustrating how an article or review compares to other articles or reviews within the selected time period in the same journal. Selecting the 1-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year. Selecting the 3-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year plus the two years prior.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Article Description
Resumen Los protocolos de investigación están incorporando a la lista de criterios de inclusión la firma del consentimiento informado. Esta situación se puede deber a una confusión conceptual, intención de manipulación del sujeto e incluso discriminación y coerción. La presente reflexión repasa los conceptos básicos de criterios de inclusión y se analizan las consecuencias negativas de reducir la participación voluntaria del individuo en la investigación y el proceso de consentimiento informado a la firma de un documento que, a su vez, se equipara como criterio para reclutar sujetos.
Bibliographic Details
http://personaybioetica.unisabana.edu.co/index.php/personaybioetica/article/view/6219/pdf; http://dx.doi.org/10.5294/pebi.2016.20.2.9; http://www.scielo.org.co/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0123-31222016000200244&lng=en&tlng=en; http://www.scielo.org.co/scielo.php?script=sci_abstract&pid=S0123-31222016000200244&lng=en&tlng=en; http://www.scielo.org.co/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0123-31222016000200244; http://www.scielo.org.co/scielo.php?script=sci_abstract&pid=S0123-31222016000200244; https://dx.doi.org/10.5294/pebi.2016.20.2.9; https://personaybioetica.unisabana.edu.co/index.php/personaybioetica/article/view/244/pdf
Universidad de la Sabana
Provide Feedback
Have ideas for a new metric? Would you like to see something else here?Let us know