Abstract
Public pressure for innovation plays a key role in determining the goals of neurosurgical research and practice. Public, philanthropic, and industry funding of research and innovation each have direct and differing effects on the advances achieved in neurosurgical practice, while public advocacy and pressure for specific treatments can shift clinical practice patterns. In this chapter, we will discuss how these varied forms of public pressure for innovation should meet the criteria of beneficence, non-maleficence, autonomy, and justice, just as the care provided by neurosurgeons should.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
Buhles WC. Compassionate use: a story of ethics and science in the development of a new drug. Perspect Biol Med. 2011;54(3):304–15.
Mukherjee S. The emperor of all maladies: a biography of cancer. New York: Scribner; 2010.
Brinker N, Braun S. The Susan G. Komen Breast Cancer Foundation. Breast Dis. 1998;10(5–6):23–8.
Maza J. Patient advocacy profile: Susan G. Komen Breast Cancer Foundation. Clin Adv Hematol Oncol H&O. 2004;2(2):129–30.
Meyerson D. Is there a right to access innovative surgery? Bioethics. 2015;29(5):342–52.
McKneally MF, Daar AS. Introducing new technologies: protecting subjects of surgical innovation and research. World J Surg. 2003;27(8):930–4; discussion 934–5.
Bowman M, Racke M, Kissel J, Imitola J. Responsibilities of health care professionals in counseling and educating patients with incurable neurological diseases regarding “stem cell tourism”: caveat emptor. JAMA Neurol. 2015;72(11):1342–5.
Berkowitz AL, Miller MB, Mir SA, et al. Glioproliferative lesion of the spinal cord as a complication of “stem-cell tourism”. N Engl J Med. 2016;375(2):196–8.
Cote DJ, Bredenoord AL, Smith TR, et al. Ethical clinical translation of stem cell interventions for neurologic disease. Neurology. 2017;88(3):322–8.
Campbell EG. The future of research funding in academic medicine. N Engl J Med. 2009;360(15):1482–3.
Lauer MS, Nakamura R. Reviewing peer review at the NIH. N Engl J Med. 2015;373(20):1893–5.
Hudson KL, Collins FS. The 21st century cures act—a view from the NIH. N Engl J Med. 2017;376(2):111–3.
Cote DJ, Balak N, Brennum J, et al. Ethical difficulties in the innovative surgical treatment of patients with recurrent glioblastoma multiforme. J Neurosurg. 2017;126(6):2045–50.
DiPaola CP, Dea N, Dvorak MF, Lee RS, Hartig D, Fisher CG. Surgeon-industry conflict of interest: survey of opinions regarding industry-sponsored educational events and surgeon teaching: clinical article. J Neurosurg Spine. 2014;20(3):313–21.
Janssen SJ, Bredenoord AL, Dhert W, de Kleuver M, Oner FC, Verlaan JJ. Potential conflicts of interest of editorial board members from five leading spine journals. PLoS One. 2015;10(6):e0127362.
Hollak CE, Biegstraaten M, Baumgartner MR, et al. Position statement on the role of healthcare professionals, patient organizations and industry in European Reference Networks. Orphanet J Rare Dis. 2016;11:7.
Driscoll B. Frankie-Rose’s family raise 175,000 in just one week to fund overseas cancer treatment. 2014. http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2014/11/17/frankie-rose-lea-raise-money-cancer-treatment-proton-beam_n_6170624.html. Accessed 2 Mar 2017.
Fisher CG, DiPaola CP, Noonan VK, Bailey C, Dvorak MF. Physician-industry conflict of interest: public opinion regarding industry-sponsored research. J Neurosurg Spine. 2012;17(1):1–10.
Bailey CS, Fehlings MG, Rampersaud YR, Hall H, Wai EK, Fisher CG. Industry and evidence-based medicine: believable or conflicted? A systematic review of the surgical literature. Can J Surg. 2011;54(5):321–6.
Hurst DJ. Restoring a reputation: invoking the UNESCO Universal Declaration on Bioethics and Human Rights to bear on pharmaceutical pricing. Med Health Care Philos. 2017;20(1):105–17.
Berndt ER. To inform or persuade? Direct-to-consumer advertising of prescription drugs. N Engl J Med. 2005;352(4):325–8.
Donohue JM, Cevasco M, Rosenthal MB. A decade of direct-to-consumer advertising of prescription drugs. N Engl J Med. 2007;357(7):673–81.
Greene JA, Watkins ES. The vernacular of risk—rethinking direct-to-consumer advertising of pharmaceuticals. N Engl J Med. 2015;373(12):1087–9.
Cushing’s Support and Research Foundation. https://csrf.net/. Accessed 24 Feb 2017.
Rose SL. Patient advocacy organizations: institutional conflicts of interest, trust, and trustworthiness. J Law Med Ethics. 2013;41(3):680–7.
Rose SL, Highland J, Karafa MT, Joffe S. Patient advocacy organizations, industry funding, and conflicts of interest. JAMA Intern Med. 2017;177(3):344–50.
Emanuel EJ, Wendler D, Grady C. What makes clinical research ethical? JAMA. 2000;283(20):2701–11.
Meyerson D. Innovative surgery and the precautionary principle. J Med Philos. 2013;38(6):605–24.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2019 Springer Nature Switzerland AG
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Cote, D.J. (2019). Public Pressure for Neurosurgical Innovation. In: Broekman, M. (eds) Ethics of Innovation in Neurosurgery. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-05502-8_9
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-05502-8_9
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-030-05501-1
Online ISBN: 978-3-030-05502-8
eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)