Jämför metoder

	Klinisk prövningsregistrering	Risk-Benefit Assessment in Research Protocols
Ämnesområde	Forskningsetik	Forskningsetik
Familj	Process / pipeline	Process / pipeline
Ursprungsår	2005	1979
Upphovsperson	World Health Organization; International Committee of Medical Journal Editors	U.S. Department of Health and Human Services; International research ethics community
Typ	Requirement	Framework
Ursprungskälla	World Health Organization. (2005). Ensuring that Studies Are Prospectively Registered. International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) Statement.	The National Commission for the Protection of Human Subjects of Biomedical and Behavioral Research. (1979). The Belmont Report: Ethical Principles and Guidelines for the Protection of Human Subjects of Research.
Alias	trial registration, prospective registration, ClinicalTrials.gov, trial registry	risk-benefit analysis, risk-benefit calculation, risk-benefit justification, harm-benefit ratio
Närliggande	5	5
Sammanfattning	Clinical trial registration is the prospective documentation of a trial's key information (hypothesis, design, population, outcomes) in a public registry before enrollment begins or results are known. In 2005, the World Health Organization established the requirement that all clinical trials be registered in an internationally recognized registry before participant enrollment. The International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) made registration a condition for publication in major medical journals in 2005, updated in 2015. Primary registries include ClinicalTrials.gov (U.S.), ISRCTN (UK), EudraCT (EU), and others operating under WHO oversight. Registration serves to prevent selective outcome reporting, reduce publication bias, and enhance research transparency.	A risk-benefit assessment is a systematic evaluation of the potential harms and benefits of a proposed research study, documented in ethics committee applications. The Belmont Report (1979) established the principle of beneficence—maximizing benefits while minimizing harm—as a cornerstone of research ethics. Regulatory frameworks (45 CFR 46.111 in the U.S., equivalent in other jurisdictions) require ethics committees to determine that risks are reasonable in relation to anticipated benefits before approving research. This assessment is not a simple calculation (risks + benefits) but a qualitative judgment incorporating probability, magnitude, and distribution of harms and benefits.