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.
125 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 11386919)
1. The role of local institutional review boards in protecting human research subjects. Burman WJ; Schooley RT JAMA; 2001 Jun; 285(21):2713. PubMed ID: 11386919 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
2. Variability among institutional review boards and the value of local research context. Clark DC Crit Care Med; 2001 Feb; 29(2):444-5. PubMed ID: 11246330 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
3. Institutional review boards: a crisis in confidence. Levine RJ Ann Intern Med; 2001 Jan; 134(2):161-3. PubMed ID: 11177321 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
4. Use of human subjects in experimentation. Institutional review boards: purposes, protocols, legal responsibilities. Knepper JD J Am Med Rec Assoc (1980); 1982 Oct; 53(5):97-101. PubMed ID: 10298700 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
11. The institutional review board and beyond: future challenges to the ethics of human experimentation. Edgar H; Rothman DJ Milbank Q; 1995; 73(4):489-506. PubMed ID: 7491097 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Toward protecting the safety of participants in clinical trials. Califf RM; Morse MA; Wittes J; Goodman SN; Nelson DK; DeMets DL; Iafrate RP; Sugarman J Control Clin Trials; 2003 Jun; 24(3):256-71. PubMed ID: 12757992 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Variation in institutional review board responses to a standard protocol for a multicenter clinical trial. Stair TO; Reed CR; Radeos MS; Koski G; Camargo CA; Acad Emerg Med; 2001 Jun; 8(6):636-41. PubMed ID: 11388939 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. The role of institutional support in protecting human research subjects. Sugarman J Acad Med; 2000 Jul; 75(7):687-92. PubMed ID: 10926018 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Current experience of central versus local ethics approval in multicentre studies. Watling MI; Dewhurst JK J R Coll Physicians Lond; 1993 Oct; 27(4):399-402. PubMed ID: 8018149 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
16. Breaking the camel's back: multicenter clinical trials and local institutional review boards. Burman WJ; Reves RR; Cohn DL; Schooley RT Ann Intern Med; 2001 Jan; 134(2):152-7. PubMed ID: 11177319 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Growing pains: central review board project still developing. Randal J J Natl Cancer Inst; 2003 May; 95(9):636-7. PubMed ID: 12734305 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
18. Bad science and the role of institutional review boards. Silverman WA Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med; 2000 Dec; 154(12):1183-4. PubMed ID: 11115298 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
19. Challenges in human subject protection. Nightingale SL Food Drug Law J; 1995; 50(4):493-501. PubMed ID: 10343016 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
20. India. New guidelines promise stronger bioethics. Bagla P Science; 2000 Nov; 290(5493):919. PubMed ID: 11184730 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [Next] [New Search]