A Texas doctor used his GOP connections to get hydroxychloroquine to administer to dozens of elderly patients diagnosed with COVID-19 in what he calls an "observational study." In some cases, he didn't discuss with families before prescribing the drug.https://trib.al/9wF549I
-
-
Replying to @NPR
This is, of course, utterly unethical human experimentation.
40 replies 192 retweets 2,594 likes -
Dr. Gorski, I agree with the broader concerns about plaquenil, but this is really not experimentation nor is it unethical. Ironically, if he randomly chose who gets the drug and who doesn't THAT would be unethical human experimentation. But is described is standard off-label rx.
10 replies 1 retweet 11 likes -
He plans on publishing his results to add to the research on
#COVID19. That’s experimentation and he should have gotten IRB approval.
pic.twitter.com/B0vI08LTlc
1 reply 4 retweets 62 likes -
IMO the line between tracking outcomes/quality improvement and research is not always as distinct as we would like. If a surgeon adopts a ligasure for thyroidectomies, tracks OR times and bleeds, and then decides to publish them, is that research that requires a prospective IRB?
3 replies 0 retweets 4 likes -
IRB member here. This is absolutely human subjects research and requires IRB approval.pic.twitter.com/7Izw841Zi0
2 replies 0 retweets 22 likes -
https://irb.research.chop.edu/quality-improvement-vs-research … Other IRBs would seem to disagree with you. Yes, he would need approval for a retrospective review before he published the data. Most IRBs wouldn't require a prospective one.
2 replies 0 retweets 3 likes -
Thank you for providing a link which very clearly deliniates the difference between QI and research. Giving a drug to human subjects for the purpose of “knowledge-seeking” intended to “answer a question or test a hypothesis" that "may put subjects at risk” is…research, not QI.pic.twitter.com/ohhv7FTs7D
1 reply 0 retweets 12 likes -
If you read one of the articles posted earlier, Dr. Robin Armstrong states he is doing what he would want done "for his mother or father". Which implies rather strongly he is giving the drug for the purpose of treating his patients, with answering a research question secondary.
4 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @aribindi @DrLesterColl and
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.houstonchronicle.com/news/houston-texas/houston/amp/texas-city-nursing-home-doctor-unproven-drug-trump-15192584.php … "Armstrong said what he’s doing was not intended as an experiment, but nonetheless he plans to release the results in case they’re useful."
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
So, in other words, he’s trying to have it both ways. Nope. It’s STILL human research. His ignorance of the rules does NOT excuse him.
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.