This Article  • References  • Full text PDF  • Send to a friend  • Save in My Folder  • Save to citation manager  • Permissions  Citing Articles  • Contact me when this article is cited  Related Content  • Similar articles in JAMA  Social Bookmarking   What's this?

Harry F. Hull, MD; Nick M. Keller; Jane Wilson, MS
New Mexico Health and Environment Department Santa Fe

Carl J. Bettinger, MD
University of New Mexico School of Law Albuquerque

Margaret M. Gallaher, MD
Centers for Disease Control Atlanta, Ga

Gregory J. Mertz, MD
University of New Mexico School of Medicine Albuquerque

JAMA. 1989;261(17):2502-2503.

	Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text PDF and any section headings.

In Reply. —

We wish to thank Ms Levine and Dr Nolan for their ethical review of our blinded study of persons who refused anonymous HIV testing. From the wording of their letter, we believe that blinded and anonymous testing need to be distinguished. In both procedures, identifying information is removed from the specimen and the test result cannot be linked with an individual by the testing source. In anonymous testing, a client electing to be tested is given a unique number by which he or she alone can access the results. In blinded testing, blood taken for other purposes is tested and results are linked only to demographic information about the client. Blinded testing is permitted under federal regulations governing protection of human subjects.¹ With either procedure, it would not be possible to inform a person, such as a military commander, of anyone's HIV status.

We disagree with . . . [Full Text PDF of this Article]

CiteULike    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter     What's this?