These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.
26. Health Sciences Council of Japan adopts guidelines for gene therapy clinical research. Int Dig Health Legis; 1995; 46(4):560-3. PubMed ID: 11657358 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
27. Changing federal regulation of IRBs, Part III: social research and the proposed DHEW regulations. Gray BH IRB; 1980 Jan; 2(1):1-5+. PubMed ID: 11661793 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
28. How can research ethics committees protect patients better? Garattini S; Bertele V; Li Bassi L BMJ; 2003 May; 326(7400):1199-201. PubMed ID: 12775624 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
29. HIV infection. Clinical research. Considerations for prospective participants. Hutchins SA; Eckes R Nurs Clin North Am; 1996 Mar; 31(1):125-35. PubMed ID: 8604375 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
30. Informed consent. Explicit guidance is required on valid exemptions for need for ethical review. Woodcock T; Norman J BMJ; 1997 Jul; 315(7102):250. PubMed ID: 9253284 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
31. Informed consent in medical research. Ethics committees and BMJ should continue to consider the overall benefit to patients. Little P; Williamson I BMJ; 1997 May; 314(7092):1478. PubMed ID: 9167572 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
32. Ethics in medicine and law--standards and conflicts. Norton ML Scapel Quill; 1977 Sep; 11(3):1-20. PubMed ID: 11662516 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
33. Institutional review boards and public health research: an analysis. Hogue LL Univ Ark Little Rock Law J; 1978; 1(2):428-54. PubMed ID: 11661619 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
34. WHO views on responsibilities of research ethics boards and good clinical practice (GCP). Idänpään-Heikkilä J NCBHR Commun; 1993; 4(2):7-10. PubMed ID: 11652888 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
35. [Different opinions when it comes to research ethics issues concerning patients with dementia. A questionnaire study among members of research ethics committees]. Peterson G; Wallin A Lakartidningen; 2004 May; 101(20):1810-2. PubMed ID: 15190768 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
36. Ethics review in Canada: highlights from a national workshop, part 2. Miller JN Ann R Coll Physicians Surg Can; 1990 Jan; 23(1):29-33. PubMed ID: 11650304 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
37. Do medical student research subjects need special protection? Christakis N IRB; 1985; 7(3):1-4. PubMed ID: 11649647 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
38. [Patient autonomy. A useful or Utopian principle in clinical practice?]. Førde R Tidsskr Nor Laegeforen; 1995 Aug; 115(20):2568-70. PubMed ID: 7676424 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
39. [Time for professionalising the system of medical ethics review in the Netherlands]. Kenter MJ; Visser HK Ned Tijdschr Geneeskd; 2003 Aug; 147(35):1672-5. PubMed ID: 14513537 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]