Innovation Persuasion Doctrine (IPD): Synthetic Counterfactual Stress-Test Dataset for Research Consent Ethics

IPD addresses a specific problem in informed consent: whether investigators may use truthful statements about the scientific or social value of medical innovation as persuasive weight when encouraging an individual participant to accept research-related uncertainty or bodily risk.</p><p dir="ltr">The repository contains 20,000 synthetic counterfactual scenarios, doctrinal-gap cases, one-variable boundary tests, structural-vulnerability extensions, 600 matched resource-context pairs, safeguard scenarios, and autonomous-altruism negative controls.

These materials were constructed to examine the conceptual boundaries, internal consistency, and possible overreach of the proposed ethical framework.</p><p dir="ltr"><b>These data are entirely synthetic.</b> They contain no patients, research participants, medical records, court records, or personally identifiable information. The scenarios and derived indices are not empirical observations. Their frequencies, proportions, and contrasts should not be interpreted as prevalence estimates, causal effects, behavioral findings, or predictions about real-world informed-consent decisions.</p><p dir="ltr">The dataset is provided to support transparency, reproducibility, critical evaluation, and further methodological discussion of the proposed framework.</p>