The ethical justification for inclusion of neonates in pragmatic randomized clinical trials for emergency newborn care
Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jan 22, 2026

A Modified Sonographic Algorithm for Image Acquisition in Life-Threatening Emergencies in the Critically Ill Newborn
Published on: April 7, 2023
1College of Health Sciences, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Makerere University, P.O. Box 7072, Kampala, Uganda. dankkaye@yahoo.com.
Insights
Excluding neonates from clinical trials denies them potential benefits and hinders evidence-based care. Pragmatic randomized clinical trials (PCTs) offer ethical solutions for including vulnerable neonates in research, requiring modified designs and oversight.
Area of Science:
- Neonatal research ethics
- Clinical trial methodology
- Vulnerable populations in research
Background:
- Current research guidelines protect neonates but limit their participation in randomized clinical trials (RCTs).
- This exclusion prevents neonates from accessing potentially beneficial treatments and hinders the generation of essential evidence for their care.
- Consequently, neonatal medical care often lacks a basis in robust research findings.
Purpose of the Study:
- To address the ethical concerns surrounding the exclusion of neonates from research.
- To explore the potential of pragmatic randomized clinical trials (PCTs) to ethically include neonates in research.
- To identify necessary modifications in research design, consent, and oversight for neonatal PCTs.
Main Methods:
- Discussed the ethical implications of excluding vulnerable populations, specifically neonates, from research.
- Examined the characteristics of pragmatic randomized clinical trials (PCTs) that may reduce risks for neonates.
- Considered modifications to study designs, informed consent procedures, and regulatory oversight for neonatal PCTs.
Main Results:
- Excluding neonates from research denies them potential benefits and hinders the development of evidence-based neonatal care.
- Pragmatic randomized clinical trials (PCTs) can be ethically adapted to include neonates by modifying study designs, consent processes, and regulatory frameworks.
- Modifications may include using group-level randomization, minimizing invasive procedures, and relying on locally available outcome data.
Conclusions:
- Under specific conditions, prospective randomized trials involving neonates are ethically permissible.
- Inclusion of neonates in research, particularly through PCTs, requires careful consideration and adaptation of existing research protocols.
- Modifications in research design, consent procedures, and oversight are crucial for ethically incorporating neonates into clinical research.
Background:
Research guidelines generally recognize vulnerable populations to include neonates with the aim of enhancing protections from harm. In practice, such guidance results in limiting participation in randomized clinical trials (RCTs). Yet while medical care of neonates should be based on best research evidence to ensure that safe, efficacious treatment or procedures are used, this seldom happens in contemporary practice.
Discussion:
The compelling need to generate information on effectiveness and safety of procedures and medications that are already in use during neonatal care has led to increase in calls for pragmatic randomized clinical trials (PCTs). This raises ethical concerns as to whether exclusion of the vulnerable populations from research participations constitutes harm. First, neonates are denied access to both potentially beneficial research outputs and an opportunity to generate data on how interventions or medications perform in diverse clinical settings and inform clinical decision-making. Secondly, risks and harms in PCTs may differ from traditional RCTs, and can be reduced by modifications in study designs. The latter may involve assessment of effectiveness of comparable medication, devices or practices (whose safety data is available), randomization at the group level rather than at the individual level, avoidance of invasive and innovative study procedures, reliance on locally available data on relevant patient outcomes, and employment of procedures that tend to meet the criteria of minimal risk for human subject research. Thirdly, informed consent procedures should be modified from those of traditional RCTs, as neonates in traditional RCTs may be vulnerable to different extents in PCTs. Lastly, regulatory and oversight procedures designed for traditional RCT settings need modification, as they may not be translatable, feasible, appropriate or even ethical to apply in PCTs.
Conclusion:
The principle of justice, commonly interpreted as preventing an inequitable burden of research, should also allow fair access to potential benefits from PCTs for neonates and other vulnerable populations. Under certain conditions, prospective randomized trials involving neonates should be ethically permissible to allow inclusion of neonates in research. This may require modification of the research design, consent procedures or regulations for research oversight.
Related Concept Videos
Clinical Trials
There are four phases in a clinical trial. A phase one...
Clinical Trials: Overview
Ethics in Research
Statistical Software for Data Analysis and Clinical Trials
Inclusive Fitness
Cell Inclusions

