276 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 11656944)
1. "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]
2. Hyperbaric research at Duke University--ethical considerations.
Bennett PB; Kylstra JA
Forsvarsmedicin; 1973; 9(3):373-8. PubMed ID: 11661280
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
3. Informed consent is binding contract: Dahl v. HEM Pharmaceuticals.
Maloney DM
Hum Res Rep; 1995 Dec; 10(12):4-5. PubMed ID: 11653220
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
4. Human experimentation: the review process in practice.
Cowan DH
Case West Reserve Law Rev; 1975; 25(3):533-64. PubMed ID: 11661165
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
5. Obtaining "informed consent": controversy over radiation tests focuses attention on rules for human subjects.
Wheeler DL
Chron High Educ; 1994 Jan; 40():8-9, 16. PubMed ID: 11658067
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
6. Informed consent process is deemed "legally and ethically invalid" by witness.
Maloney DM
Hum Res Rep; 1995 Jan; 10(1):4-5. PubMed ID: 11660008
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
7. 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]
8. 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]
9. Should IRBs monitor research more strictly?
Christakis NA
IRB; 1988; 10(2):8-10. PubMed ID: 11650024
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
10. 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]
11. The law of institutional review boards.
Robertson JA
UCLA Law Rev; 1980 Feb; 26(3):484-549. PubMed ID: 11661806
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
12. Ethics of research involving children.
Lynch A
Ann R Coll Physicians Surg Can; 1992 Oct; 25(6):371-2. PubMed ID: 11659510
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
13. 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]
14. What a national research ethics committee does.
Riis P
Bull Med Ethics; 1992 Dec; No. 84():13-6. PubMed ID: 11651571
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
15. "Evaluation of human subject protections in schizophrenia research conducted by the University of ..." (Part III).
Maloney DM
Hum Res Rep; 2000 Jan; 15(1):5-6. PubMed ID: 11658036
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
16. 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]
17. The report of the Advisory Research Committee on the ethics review of research involving human subjects.
Queens Gazette; 1974 : 1-5, 30 Jan; 6(4) Suppl):. PubMed ID: 11663457
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
18. 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]
19. The subject is children.
Hiatt F
Trial; 1975; 11(6):19+. PubMed ID: 11662203
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
20. Dilemmas in paying for clinical research: the view from the IRB.
Lind SE
IRB; 1987; 9(2):1-5. PubMed ID: 11649900
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
