Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Concept Videos

Types of Biopharmaceutical Studies: Controlled and Non-Controlled Approaches01:23

Types of Biopharmaceutical Studies: Controlled and Non-Controlled Approaches

Biopharmaceutical studies constitute a vital field aiming to enhance drug delivery methods and refine therapeutic approaches, drawing upon diverse interdisciplinary knowledge. In research methodologies, the choice between controlled and non-controlled studies significantly influences the study's reliability and accuracy.
Non-controlled studies, commonly employed for initial exploration, lack a control group, rendering them susceptible to biases and external influences. In contrast, controlled...
Clinical Trials01:16

Clinical Trials

Clinical trials are prospective experimental studies conducted on humans to determine the safety and efficacy of treatments, drugs, diet methods, and medical devices. Using statistics in clinical trials enables researchers to derive reasonable and accurate conclusions from the collected data, allowing them to make wise decisions in uncertain situations. In medical research, statistical methods are crucial for preventing errors and bias.
There are four phases in a clinical trial. A phase one...
Clinical Trials: Overview01:11

Clinical Trials: Overview

Clinical development focuses on how the drug will interact with the human body and encompasses four key phases of clinical trials, each serving a specific purpose in assessing the safety and effectiveness of new drugs. These phases overlap and build upon one another. Phase I involves a small group of healthy volunteers (typically 20-80 individuals) or, in cases where significant toxicity is expected, patients with the targeted disease, such as cancer or AIDS. The volunteers are tested for...
Preclinical Development: Overview01:28

Preclinical Development: Overview

Preclinical development consists of a series of tests that ensure the safety and efficacy of a new therapeutic compound before it is tested in humans. There are four main phases to this process. First, safety pharmacology tests are conducted to ensure the drug does not produce any acutely harmful effects. These tests examine parameters such as bronchoconstriction, cardiac dysrhythmias, blood pressure changes, and ataxia. Next, preliminary toxicological testing is performed to determine the...
Hazard Ratio01:12

Hazard Ratio

The hazard ratio (HR) is a widely used measure in clinical trials to compare the risk of events, such as death or disease recurrence, between two groups over time. It reflects the ratio of hazard rates—the instantaneous risk of the event occurring—between a treatment group and a control group. This measure provides valuable insights into the relative effectiveness of a treatment by assessing how the risk of an event differs between the two groups.
For example, in a clinical trial evaluating a...
Ethics in Research01:56

Ethics in Research

Today, scientists agree that good research is ethical in nature and is guided by a basic respect for human dignity and safety. However, this has not always been the case. Modern researchers must demonstrate that the research they perform is ethically sound.

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same author

Replacing Surrogate Decision-Making with Supported Decision-Making for Minimal Risk Research.

The Journal of law, medicine & ethics : a journal of the American Society of Law, Medicine & Ethics·2026
Same author

Intellectual Disability and Supported Decision-Making in Clinical Research: Anticipating Ethical Challenges.

The Journal of law, medicine & ethics : a journal of the American Society of Law, Medicine & Ethics·2026
Same author

Using Supported Decision-Making to Promote Value-Aligned Research Participation.

The Journal of law, medicine & ethics : a journal of the American Society of Law, Medicine & Ethics·2026
Same author

Supported Decision-Making and the Inclusion of People who Lack Decisional Capacity in Greater than Minimal Risk Research.

The Journal of law, medicine & ethics : a journal of the American Society of Law, Medicine & Ethics·2026
Same author

The next phase in Long COVID research: addressing the ethical challenges in trials of disease-modifying treatments.

EClinicalMedicine·2026
Same author

Surrogate Decision-Making in Carceral Healthcare.

Journal of general internal medicine·2026

Related Experiment Video

Updated: Jun 8, 2026

Working with Human Tissues for Translational Cancer Research
07:48

Working with Human Tissues for Translational Cancer Research

Published on: November 26, 2015

Evaluating the risks of clinical research.

Annette Rid1, Ezekiel J Emanuel, David Wendler

  • 1Department of Bioethics, NIH Clinical Center, Bethesda, MD 20892, USA.

JAMA
|October 7, 2010
PubMed
Summary

Protecting clinical research participants requires a systematic approach to risk assessment. The Systematic Evaluation of Research Risks (SERR) method minimizes cognitive biases for better participant safety.

Area of Science:

  • Clinical Research Ethics
  • Risk Assessment Methodologies
  • Cognitive Bias in Research

Background:

  • Ethical clinical research hinges on safeguarding participants from undue risks.
  • Current risk assessment relies on intuitive judgments, susceptible to cognitive biases.
  • Lack of a systematic framework compromises participant protection.

Purpose of the Study:

  • Introduce a novel method, Systematic Evaluation of Research Risks (SERR), to objectively assess research risks.
  • Mitigate the impact of cognitive biases in evaluating participant safety.
  • Enhance the ethical rigor of clinical research oversight.

Main Methods:

  • SERR involves a 4-step process for evaluating research intervention risks.
  • Step 1: Identify potential harms of the research intervention.

More Related Videos

A Novel Method for Involving Women of Color at High Risk for Preterm Birth in Research Priority Setting
14:43

A Novel Method for Involving Women of Color at High Risk for Preterm Birth in Research Priority Setting

Published on: January 12, 2018

A Clinical Trial Assessing the Safety, Efficacy, and Delivery of Olive-Oil-Based Three-Chamber Bags for Parenteral Nutrition
04:53

A Clinical Trial Assessing the Safety, Efficacy, and Delivery of Olive-Oil-Based Three-Chamber Bags for Parenteral Nutrition

Published on: September 20, 2019

Related Experiment Videos

Last Updated: Jun 8, 2026

Working with Human Tissues for Translational Cancer Research
07:48

Working with Human Tissues for Translational Cancer Research

Published on: November 26, 2015

A Novel Method for Involving Women of Color at High Risk for Preterm Birth in Research Priority Setting
14:43

A Novel Method for Involving Women of Color at High Risk for Preterm Birth in Research Priority Setting

Published on: January 12, 2018

A Clinical Trial Assessing the Safety, Efficacy, and Delivery of Olive-Oil-Based Three-Chamber Bags for Parenteral Nutrition
04:53

A Clinical Trial Assessing the Safety, Efficacy, and Delivery of Olive-Oil-Based Three-Chamber Bags for Parenteral Nutrition

Published on: September 20, 2019

  • Step 2: Categorize harm magnitude using a 7-level scale.
  • Step 3: Quantify or estimate the likelihood of each harm.
  • Step 4: Compare research harm likelihoods with acceptable comparator activities.

    • Main Results:

    • SERR provides a structured framework for risk evaluation.
    • Explicitly delineating, quantifying, and comparing risks reduces subjective bias.
    • The method facilitates more consistent and reliable risk assessments.

    Conclusions:

    • SERR offers a systematic approach to minimize cognitive bias in research risk assessment.
    • This method enhances the protection of clinical research participants from excessive risks.
    • Implementation of SERR can improve the ethical oversight of research studies.