International Journal of Clinical Trials | October-December 2016 | Vol 3 | Issue 4 Page 180 International Journal of Clinical Trials Buken NO. Int J Clin Trials. 2016 Nov;3(4):180-186 http://www.ijclinicaltrials.com pISSN 2349-3240 | eISSN 2349-3259 Review Article Clinical trial ethics in Turkey in the context of some expectations and predictions Nuket Ornek Buken* INTRODUCTION It is a reality that the ethical problems existing in scientific research, particularly in biomedical research, can reach considerable limits. In order to be acceptable at an international level, the related ethical principles as well as the harmonization of methodology and semantics, must be specified in scientific research activities. In various countries in which the production of scientific knowledge has become possible, the existence of different cultural characteristics can be observed. Nevertheless, to whatever extent their culture and the level of their social and economic development may differ from each other, there should be “universal ethical principles” which would be binding for scientists living in different geographies. In medical research activities, accordingly, the concept of “universality” has come to the fore in recent times. And there is a need now for a consensus about the fundamental values which govern these activities. Only in such a way would it be possible to have common ethical principles in terms of research carried out in different countries. In clinical drug trials in medicine, the principal element is the “human” component. This concept covers the investigator himself as well as the patient-subject, who is the research material. The aim of the biomedical research involving human subjects is to develop the diagnostic, therapeutic and/or preventive procedures or to explain the etiology and pathogenesis of disease. This research may involve the diagnosis and treatment of a patient; or may be carried out on experimental subject solely for “pure” scientific purposes. Thus, while the patient in the first category is both an “object” or “end” and a “means” or ABSTRACT Why is so much attention now being given to the ethics of clinical trial? Why does debate continue over the ethics and regulation of research involving human subjects? Are there societal duties to support the conduct of clinical research? Why was this protocol good enough for X, or Y, or Z, but not good enough for this university or institution? What is the rationale for public bioethics? As shown even though all the rights and obligations of all parties of clinical trial – the researching physician, the volunteering patient, the industry, research institution- have been assured with ethico-legal regulations, there still exist many problems in the world of clinical research, and suggestions of solutions to the said problems. It is obvious that medical trials on human beings, on the one hand, accelerate developments in medicine and offer benefits for the present and future generations, but on the other hand, they can lead to acts that may endanger human dignity and human value. The objective of this paper is to discuss the rights of human subjects in clinical drug trials; to review the researcher-physician/subject-patients relationship from several aspects; to consider the dynamics which exist in this relation; and to reach some practical solutions that might be conveyed to the applications in the context of medical ethics in Turkey. Keywords: Clinical trial, Ethics, Turkey, Biological material of human origin Department of Medical Ethics, Hacettepe University, Faculty of Medicine, Ankara, Turkey Received: 10 August 2016 Accepted: 10 September 2016 *Correspondence: Dr. Nuket Ornek Buken, E-mail: nuketbuken@hotmail.com Copyright: © the author(s), publisher and licensee Medip Academy. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License, which permits unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.18203/2349-3259.ijct20163954