Abstract
rid the body of cancer provided it has not spread. The second patient is attracted to the radioactive plaque because it offers about the same threeto-five year life expectancy as surgery, and there is no point in removing the eye if there is no guarantee that it is going to let the patient live longer. The third patient claims that the other two Have it all wrong. He argues that since neither my doctor nor any other doctor knows which treatment is better there surely is no way for me to know. He defends the randomization process by appealing to altruistic considerations: a desire to find an answer and make the world a little better. The device of presenting an imaginary patient conversation is an interesting one. Explaining to patients the justification of randomization is difficult. I am convinced, however, that the message conveyed in this conversation-especially the claim that if the doctors cannot know which treatment
Published Version
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call