The Ambivalence of Early Diagnosis – Returning Results in Current Alzheimer Research

E-ISSN： 1875-5828|15|1|28-37

ISSN： 1567-2050

Source： Current Alzheimer Research, Vol.15, Iss.1, 2018-01, pp. : 28-37

Disclaimer: Any content in publications that violate the sovereignty, the constitution or regulations of the PRC is not accepted or approved by CNPIEC.

Previous Menu Next

Abstract

Objectives: Based on an analysis of the potential consequences of disclosing AD suspicions fromrespective research and using the research ethical principle of non-maleficence, the authors of this paper arguefor the thesis that the benefits of early AD detection in research outweigh the risk of potential adverse effectsonly in cases where studies are conducted with symptomatic people actively seeking for support, e.g. as theyutilize the services of memory clinics.Conclusion: In the case of non-symptomatic volunteers, the result of the risk-benefit-assessment seems to beless distinctive. Given that disclosing results can, at least initially, cause severe distress and harm and takinginto account that research examinations have a significantly increased risk of producing false-positive findings,we suggest to make use of a research-ethical “princple of caution” that supports a restrictive disclosure policyfor the second group of potential study participants. This differentiated view on the benefits of disclosed findingsin AD research is reflected in recommendations for the set-up of return of result processes.