提交案例报告给ACHICE，描述了一个具有非常严重的可治愈的传染病的患者，该患者被给予互补药物（植物提取物）而不是标准治疗。搜索文献表明，已知作者支持互补疗法。替代治疗不是基于证据。案件发生在一个国家是标准治疗很容易获得。提交人报告说，患者已获得知情同意，但没有提供任何细节。没有提到道德委员会批准实验治疗。尤其质疑编辑的可接受性：1。在没有证据表明感染性可治疗的情况下没有证据表明新疗法;2.没有道德委员会批准的规定实验治疗;3.患者被告知的程度。完全审查了稿件的呼应了这些问题。 The authors were asked to confirm/explain if they had received informed consent from the patient and ethics committee approval. They were also asked to clarify the treatment plan. In a brief email, the authors stated that they had received both consent from the patient and ethics committee approval, but after several chases, have failed to send the corresponding documents. The authors also stated that the patient was started on the standard treatment course “3 weeks later. ”The manuscript was rejected. Should the editors take further action? Does the fact that the authors advise that the patient was given standard therapy make any difference?
建议：
_这是医生的选择而不是患者的决定吗？患者是否具体要求替代治疗？没有证据证明也可以证明。_这是一个严重的问题，编者肯定应该追求提交人，以便为患者的同意和道德委员会批准的文件进行文件。_在没有任何一个呼叫作者的医疗实践和判断的情况下承担了这样的行动方案。_编辑应该再次向作者写入作者，截止日期短，告知他们此事将被提交给作者雇主和适当的监管机构。_即使患者恳求替代疗法，疾病是传染性的事实，潜在的致命意味着公共利益将超过患者的偏好。_编辑应将监管机构写入监管机构，因为所采取的行动危及患者和其他人。_警方可能还有管辖权来调查。_调查的负担不与编辑谎言; it is their duty to inform the relevant authorities.