657 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 11650252)
1. On studying the powerful (or fearing to do so): a vital role for IRBs.
Sieber JE
IRB; 1989; 11(5):1-6. PubMed ID: 11650252
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
2. Studying journal editors: the worst heresy.
Epstein WM
IRB; 1989; 11(5):7-8. PubMed ID: 11650253
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
3. Ethical aspect of research involving elderly subjects.
Fletcher JC
J Clin Ethics; 1990; 1(4):285-6. PubMed ID: 11642836
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
4. Sharing scientific data I: new problems for IRBs.
Sieber JE
IRB; 1989; 11(6):4-7. PubMed ID: 11650286
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
5. Research fraud, misconduct, and the IRB.
Hilgartner S
IRB; 1990; 12(1):1-4. PubMed ID: 11651971
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
6. Ethics of clinical trials for research ethics boards: proceedings of a national workshop.
National Council on Bioethics in Human Research (Canada)
NCBHR Commun; 1991; 2(2):4-23. PubMed ID: 11659919
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
7. Deception in scientific research.
Woolf PK
Jurimetrics; 1988; 29(1):67-95. PubMed ID: 11654908
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
8. Dentists and pseudo-patients: further meditations on deception in research.
Newton LH
IRB; 1982 Oct; 4(8):6-8. PubMed ID: 11651692
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
9. Power, advocacy, and informed consent forms.
Smith ML
J Calif Alliance Ment Ill; 1994; 5(1):25-7. PubMed ID: 11653311
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
10. Coverage of research ethics in introductory and social psychology textbooks.
Korn JH
Teach Psychol; 1984 Oct; 11(3):146-9. PubMed ID: 11650756
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
11. The editor and the IRB: should journals notify IRBs about possibly unethical research with human subjects?
Szidon JP; Swazey JP
IRB; 1986; 8(5):10-2. PubMed ID: 11653766
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
12. Scientific misconduct and editorial and peer review processes.
Fox MF
J Higher Educ; 1994; 65(3):298-309. PubMed ID: 11653366
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
13. Deception methods in psychology: have they changed in 23 years?
Sieber JE; Iannuzzo R; Rodriguez B
Ethics Behav; 1995; 5(1):67-85. PubMed ID: 11654171
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Normal and normative ethics in behavioral sciences.
Reese HW; Fremouw WJ
Am Psychol; 1984 Aug; 39(8):863-76. PubMed ID: 11644156
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
15. Multicenter trials and subject eligibility: should local IRBs play a role?
Freedman B
IRB; 1994; 16(1-2):1-6. PubMed ID: 11652320
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
16. Ethical considerations in human experimentation.
Bernstein JE
J Clin Pharmacol New Drugs; 1975; 15(8-9):579-90. PubMed ID: 11661224
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
17. "There is no substantive due process right to conduct human-subject research": the saga of the Minnesota Gamma Hydroxybutyrate Study.
Hammerschmidt DE
IRB; 1997; 19(3-4):13-5. PubMed ID: 11656944
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
18. Criminal liability for misconduct in scientific research.
Kuzma SM
Univ Mich J Law Reform; 1992; 25(2):357-421. PubMed ID: 11651584
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
19. Medical and psychological experimentation on California prisoners.
Herch F; Flower R
Univ Calif Davis Law Rev; 1974; 7():351-84. PubMed ID: 11661107
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
20. A protocol review guide to reduce IRB inconsistency.
Prentice ED; Antonson DL
IRB; 1987; 9(1):9-11. PubMed ID: 11649892
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
