What medical knowledge is worth pursuing? This is a crucial question in the field
of medical research where choices in research design manifests a valuation of
what knowledge is considered valuable and possible to realise. The question is of
import since such choices has consequences for patients, healthcare, and
business. Currently, there is a lack of knowledge of how these important choices
are made in practice. This lack of knowledge is unfortunate, not the least given
the recurrent observation that prioritisations in medical research do not always
reflect the common good.

A central point of departure for this project is that medical scientists balance
different values when they design their studies. The design-phase is especially
important as it sets the boundaries for what knowledge is possible to obtain. In
this project we study the design phase in medical experiments with a focus on the
scientific, medical, and economic values at play. We especially emphasize the
role of economic valuations.
The research questions are:

1) How are different valuations done when designing medical experiments?
2) How are economic valuations related to, and delineated from, other valuations
when designing medical experiments?

The project is devised as a series of case studies to facilitate several important
comparisons. Two types of medical experiments will be studied: large
randomized controlled trials and experiments aiming to develop so called
biomarkers for diagnostics and treatment.