As a vulnerable group, minors require special protection in studies. For this reason, researchers are often reluctant to initiate studies, and ethics committees are reluctant to authorize such studies. This often excludes minors from participating in clinical studies. This exclusion can lead to researchers and clinicians receiving only incomplete data or having to rely on adult-based findings in the treatment of minors. Using the example of the study “Computer-Assisted Risk Evaluation in the Early Detection of Psychotic Disorders” (CARE), which was conducted as an 'other clinical investigation' according to the Medical Device Regulation, we present a line of argumentation for the inclusion of minors which weighs the ethical principles of nonmaleficence (especially regarding possible stigmatization), beneficence, autonomy, and fairness. We show the necessity of including minors based on the development-specific differences in diagnostics and early intervention. Further, we present specific protective measures. This argumentation can also be transferred to other disorders with the onset in childhood and adolescence and thus help to avoid excluding minors from appropriate evidence-based care because of insufficient studies.