942 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 11657739)
1. 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]
2. 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]
3. An introduction to NBAC's report on research involving persons with mental disorders that may affect decisionmaking capacity.
Childress JF
Account Res; 1999; 7(2-4):101-15. PubMed ID: 11658169
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
4. 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]
5. Regulatory orphans: juvenile prisoners as transvulnerable research subjects.
Reed JG
IRB; 1999; 21(2):9-14. PubMed ID: 11657875
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
6. Special informed consent requirements are included in protocol review procedures.
Maloney DM
Hum Res Rep; 1995 Jul; 10(7):1-2. PubMed ID: 11654274
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
7. Proposed regulations for research involving those institutionalized as mentally infirm: a consideration of their relevance in 1995.
Levine RJ
Account Res; 1996; 4(3-4):177-86. PubMed ID: 11654513
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
8. Ethical issues in clinical neurological research.
Shore D; Berg K; Mullican C
J Calif Alliance Ment Ill; 1994; 5(1):61-2. PubMed ID: 11653329
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
9. 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]
10. Consent to research with impaired human subjects: a trial policy for the intramural programs of the National Institutes of Health.
Fletcher JC; Dommel FW; Cowell DD
IRB; 1985; 7(6):1-6. PubMed ID: 11649686
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
11. Competence and consent to research: a critique of the recommendations of the National Bioethics Advisory Commission.
Appelbaum PS
Account Res; 1999; 7(2-4):265-76. PubMed ID: 11658181
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
12. An IRB member's perspective on access to innovative therapy.
Moore DL
Albany Law Rev; 1994; 57(3):559-81. PubMed ID: 11652854
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
13. Institutional review boards (IRBs) and conflict of interest.
Shamoo AE
Account Res; 1999; 7(2-4):201-12. PubMed ID: 11658176
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
14. The ethics of involving psychiatrically impaired persons in research.
DeRenzo EG
IRB; 1994; 16(6):7-9, 11. PubMed ID: 11659990
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
15. IRBs and pharmaceutical company funding of research.
Jellinek MS; Levine RJ
IRB; 1982 Oct; 4(8):9-10. PubMed ID: 11651693
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
16. Are research ethics bad for our mental health?
Michels R
N Engl J Med; 1999 May; 340(18):1427-30. PubMed ID: 10228197
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
17. Half-full or half-empty? Evaluating IRB performance.
Mishkin B; Ariand N
Prof Ethics Rep; 1998; 11(3):4-7. PubMed ID: 11657925
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
18. Institutional review boards and research on individuals with mental disorders.
Hoppe SK
Account Res; 1996; 4(3-4):187-95. PubMed ID: 11654514
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
19. Questions and answers.
Goodwin FK
J Calif Alliance Ment Ill; 1994; 5(1):45-7. PubMed ID: 11653321
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
20. Informed consent in psychiatric research.
Roth LH; Appelbaum PS; Lidz CW; Benson P; Winslade WJ
Rutgers Law Rev; 1987; 39(2-3):425-41. PubMed ID: 11659013
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
