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

Author(s): Pia Erdmann*, Martin Langanke.

Journal Name: Current Alzheimer Research

Volume 15 , Issue 1 , 2018

  Journal Home
Translate in Chinese
Become EABM
Become Reviewer


Objectives: Based on an analysis of the potential consequences of disclosing AD suspicions from respective research and using the research ethical principle of non-maleficence, the authors of this paper argue for the thesis that the benefits of early AD detection in research outweigh the risk of potential adverse effects only in cases where studies are conducted with symptomatic people actively seeking for support, e.g. as they utilize the services of memory clinics.

Conclusion: In the case of non-symptomatic volunteers, the result of the risk-benefit-assessment seems to be less distinctive. Given that disclosing results can, at least initially, cause severe distress and harm and taking into 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 policy for the second group of potential study participants. This differentiated view on the benefits of disclosed findings in AD research is reflected in recommendations for the set-up of return of result processes.

Keywords: Alzheimer's disease, early diagnosis, mild cognitive impairment, disclosure dilemmas, research ethics, risk benefit assessment.

Rights & PermissionsPrintExport Cite as

Article Details

Year: 2018
Page: [28 - 37]
Pages: 10
DOI: 10.2174/1567205014666170908101237

Article Metrics

PDF: 28