@article{fdi:010062903,
  title = {{B}iomedical subjectivities and reproductive assumptions in the {CAMELIA} clinical trial in {C}ambodia},
  author = {{H}ancart {P}etitet, {P}ascale},
  editor = {},
  language = {{ENG}},
  abstract = {{T}he inclusion of women in clinical trials has raised a variety of ethical and practical issues in their implementation. {I}n the recent {CAMELIA} clinical trial in {C}ambodia, the inclusion criteria included a negative pregnancy test and signature of the consent form confirming commitment to double contraceptive use as patients were given drugs contra-indicated in case of pregnancy. {B}ut despite precautions and the requirement stated in the informed consent form, 19 out of 236 enrolled women became pregnant during the trial. {T}he current paper describes the frictions and subjectivities that emerge as new medical technologies travel to resource-poor settings ! and more specifically, how trial researchers, health workers, and research subjects involved in the {CAMELIA} trial negotiate the injunction to avoid pregnancy while using a teratogenic drug.},
  keywords = {{SIDA} ; {MEDICAMENT} ; {ESSAI} {CLINIQUE} ; {FEMME} ; {GROSSESSE} ; {CONTRACEPTION} ; {ETHIQUE} ; {SYSTEME} {DE} {REPRESENTATIONS} ; {ANTHROPOLOGIE} {DE} {LA} {SANTE} ; {ANTIRETROVIRAUX} ; {EFFET} {SECONDAIRE} ; {SANTE} {DE} {LA} {REPRODUCTION} ; {SANTE} {DE} {LA} {REPRODUCTION} ; {CAMBODGE}},
  booktitle = {},
  journal = {{A}nthropology and {M}edicine},
  volume = {21},
  numero = {2},
  pages = {230--240},
  ISSN = {1364-8470},
  year = {2014},
  DOI = {10.1080/13648470.2014.914805},
  URL = {https://www.documentation.ird.fr/hor/fdi:010062903},
}