BIOMARKERS

Molecular Biopsy of Human Tumors

- a resource for Precision Medicine *

509 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 11654527)

  • 1. The Ethics of Human Experimentation: Reinventing the Research Ethics Board: Proceedings of a National Workshop held in Ottawa, Ontario, March 5-6, 1995.
    National Council on Bioethics in Human Research (Canada)
    NCBHR Commun; 1996; 7(1):5-35. PubMed ID: 11654527
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Proposal for a good clinical practice directive.
    European Commission
    Bull Med Ethics; 1998 Feb; No. 135():6-11. PubMed ID: 11657249
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Conflict of interest in human research ethics.
    Jones DJ
    NCBHR Commun; 1995; 6(2):5-10. PubMed ID: 11654611
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Judging the ethical merit of clinical trials: what criteria do research ethics board members use?
    Meslin EM; Lavery JV; Sutherland HJ; Till JE
    IRB; 1994; 16(4):6-10. PubMed ID: 11654136
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Toward a more comprehensive approach to protecting human subjects: the interface of data safety monitoring boards and institutional review boards in randomized clinical trials.
    Gordon VM; Sugarman J; Kass N
    IRB; 1998; 20(1):1-5. PubMed ID: 11655324
    [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. 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]  

  • 8. Protecting and promoting the human research subject: a review of the function of research ethics boards in Canadian faculties of medicine.
    National Council on Bioethics in Human Research (Canada). Working Group on Evaluation
    NCBHR Commun; 1995; 6(1):3-32. PubMed ID: 11654937
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Regulatory orphans: juvenile prisoners as transvulnerable research subjects.
    Reed JG
    IRB; 1999; 21(2):9-14. PubMed ID: 11657875
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. 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]  

  • 11. Developing a Tri-Council code of conduct for research involving humans.
    Rolleston F; Armour C; Stipich N
    J Int Bioethique; 1997; 8(1-2):67-70. PubMed ID: 11655381
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. National commission proposes numerous new regulations of institutional review boards.
    Maloney DM
    Hum Res Rep; 1998 Oct; 13(10):1-2. PubMed ID: 11657739
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Ethical aspects of pharmaceutically-based clinical investigation: report on a national workshop.
    Miller J; Kinsella D; Klein A; Rusted I
    NCBHR Commun; 1990; 1(1):7-10. PubMed ID: 11660185
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. 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]  

  • 15. Ethical issues in the substantive and procedural aspects of research ethics review.
    Meslin EM
    Health Law Can; 1993; 13(3):179-91. PubMed ID: 10125789
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. International Conference on Harmonisation of Technical Requirements for Registration of Pharmaceuticals for Human Use (ICH) adopts Consolidated Guideline on Good Clinical Practice in the Conduct of Clinical Trials on Medicinal Products for Human Use.
    Int Dig Health Legis; 1997; 48(2):231-4. PubMed ID: 11656783
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Commission says institutional review boards should change procedures now.
    Maloney DM
    Hum Res Rep; 1999 Jan; 14(1):1-2. PubMed ID: 11657555
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Minimal risk, administrative firm trials, and informed consent.
    O'Neil TJ; Goldberg H; McGough H
    IRB; 1992; 14(3):9-10, 12. PubMed ID: 11656139
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Research fraud, misconduct, and the IRB.
    Hilgartner S
    IRB; 1990; 12(1):1-4. PubMed ID: 11651971
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Annual review: observed deficiencies and suggested corrections.
    Adams MS; Conrad DA
    IRB; 1996; 18(6):1-4. PubMed ID: 11654743
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 26.