239 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 11653053)
1. Exclusion of pregnant women from research protocols: unethical and illegal.
Hall JK
IRB; 1995; 17(2):1-3. PubMed ID: 11653053
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
2. Women and HIV/AIDS research: the barriers to equity.
Levine C
IRB; 1991; 13(1-2):18-22. PubMed ID: 11659324
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
3. Off the pedestal and into the arena: toward including women in experimental protocols.
Gorenberg H; White A
Rev Law Soc Change; 1991-1992; 19(1):205-46. PubMed ID: 11659599
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
4. Protection of human subjects.
United States
Code Fed Regul Shipping; 1982 Oct; Part 46, Sections 46.101 to 46.306():. PubMed ID: 11660819
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
5. The invisible woman: gender bias in medical research.
Keville TD
Womens Rights Law Report; 1994; 15():123-42. PubMed ID: 11660409
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
6. Institutional review boards in the university setting: review of pharmaceutical testing protocols, informed consent and ethical concerns.
Kobasic DM
J Coll Univ Law; 1988; 15(2):185-216. PubMed ID: 11659168
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
7. HIV, women, and access to clinical trials: tort liability and lessons from DES.
Mastroianni AC
Duke J Gend Law Policy; 1998; 5(1):167-91. PubMed ID: 11979601
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
8. New human subject regulations would change certain IRB reviews.
Maloney DM
Hum Res Rep; 1998 Jul; 13(7):1-2. PubMed ID: 11656820
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
9. The IRB's role in assessing the generalizability of non-NIH-funded clinical trials.
Weijer C
IRB; 1998; 20(2-3):1-5. PubMed ID: 11656912
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
10. Protecting us to death: women, pregnancy, and clinical research trials.
Charo RA
St Louis Univ Law J; 1993; 38(1):135-87. PubMed ID: 11656322
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
11. Informed consent: the FDA's perspective.
Bagley G
Food Drug Law J; 1993; 48(2):181-6. PubMed ID: 11653141
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
12. Proposed regulations on fetal research--and some reactions!
Contemp Ob Gyn; 1975 Nov; 6(5):31-3. PubMed ID: 11664652
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
13. Continuing review of research involving human subjects: approach to the problem and remaining areas of concern.
Gordon B; Prentice E
IRB; 1997; 19(2):8-11. PubMed ID: 11655323
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
14. Women in clinical trials: concluding remarks.
Buc NL
Food Drug Law J; 1993; 48(2):223-6. PubMed ID: 11653146
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
15. The abortion cocktail.
Nathanson BN
First Things; 1996 Jan; 59():23-6. PubMed ID: 11656484
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
16. Women of childbearing potential in clinical research: perspectives on NIH policy and liability issues.
Hayunga EG; Rothenberg KH; Pinn VW
Food Drug Cosmet Med Device Law Dig; 1996 Jan; 13(1):7-11. PubMed ID: 11660302
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
17. Women's and fetal rights and interests: ethical aspects.
Fletcher JC
Food Drug Law J; 1993; 48(2):213-21. PubMed ID: 11653145
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
18. A new rule for vulnerable research subjects has some special provisions.
Hum Res Rep; 1994 Jun; 9(6):1-2. PubMed ID: 11654129
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
19. Fetal experimentation: legal implications of an ethical conundrum.
Wilson JP
Denver Law J; 1976; 53(4):581-642. PubMed ID: 11664590
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
20. Research subject loses case against physician, IRB, and hospital.
Maloney DM
Hum Res Rep; 1995 Feb; 10(2):4-5. PubMed ID: 11654160
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
