Research Article
Have access already?
Get access to this article:
- Perpetual access Add to cart ($21.00)
Or get access to the entire journal:
Abstract
This article presents two clinical scenarios based on antidepressant-induced deaths, which make clear that there are a number of intervening processes in between the valuable data Read and colleagues present and the verdicts that come out of inquests. The manner in which inquests and court cases are structured means that it is very rare for even clearly-proven prescription drug induced deaths to result in a verdict that the drug has caused the death. Instead, a growing number of drug-induced deaths fuel perceptions of a need for more and better drugs.
Central to this situation is a question about how to determine causality in drug-induced injury cases. The idea that randomized controlled trials are the way to establish causality needs to be revisited. Unless there is reform, people caught in situations like the two described here would be better placed holding their own inquests, and finding ways to promulgate the resulting verdicts, rather than “trusting” in a process that is biased against them.
Period | Abstract | Full | Total | |
---|---|---|---|---|
Apr 2024 | 14 | 0 | 0 | 14 |
Mar 2024 | 54 | 0 | 2 | 56 |
Feb 2024 | 48 | 0 | 2 | 50 |
Jan 2024 | 25 | 0 | 0 | 25 |
Dec 2023 | 88 | 0 | 0 | 88 |
Nov 2023 | 32 | 0 | 0 | 32 |
Oct 2023 | 92 | 0 | 0 | 92 |
Sep 2023 | 143 | 0 | 0 | 143 |
Aug 2023 | 104 | 10 | 5 | 119 |
Jul 2023 | 102 | 12 | 2 | 116 |
Jun 2023 | 636 | 14 | 9 | 659 |
May 2023 | 183 | 8 | 3 | 194 |
Apr 2023 | 637 | 13 | 8 | 658 |
Mar 2023 | 21 | 0 | 0 | 21 |