493 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 11663254)
21. 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]
22. Protecting research subjects after consent: the case for the "research intermediary.
Reiser SJ; Knudson P
IRB; 1993; 15(2):10-1. PubMed ID: 11651567
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
23. 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]
24. 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]
25. "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]
26. 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]
27. 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]
28. Who shall decide when doctors disagree? A review of the legal development of informed consent and the implications of proposed lay review of human experimentation.
Ratnoff MF
Case West Reserve Law Rev; 1975; 25(3):472-532. PubMed ID: 11661164
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
29. Using the brain dead for medical research.
Martyn SR
Utah Law Rev; 1986; 1986(1):1-28. PubMed ID: 11651917
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
30. Nondevelopmental research on human subjects: the impact of the recommendations of the National Commission.
Levine RJ
Fed Proc; 1977 Sep; 36(10):2359-64. PubMed ID: 892005
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
31. Regulatory orphans: juvenile prisoners as transvulnerable research subjects.
Reed JG
IRB; 1999; 21(2):9-14. PubMed ID: 11657875
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
32. Fears mount for gene scrutiny as watchdog faces axe.
Kiernan V
New Sci; 1996 Jun; 150(2033):10. PubMed ID: 11656540
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
33. The politics of informed consent.
Weston HB
Natl Forum; 1978; 58(4):23-6. PubMed ID: 11661867
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
34. Two rules on expedited IRB reviews are final.
Maloney DM
Hum Res Rep; 1999 Jan; 14(1):3. PubMed ID: 11657557
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
35. DHHS internal policies for reviewing research involving children.
Reatig N
IRB; 1981 Jan; 3(1):1-4. PubMed ID: 11661894
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
36. Bill of rights for research subjects.
Prentice ED; Reitemeier PJ; Antonson DL; Kelso TK; Jameton A
IRB; 1993; 15(2):7-9. PubMed ID: 11651568
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
37. IRBs and randomized clinical trials.
Meinert CL
IRB; 1998; 20(2-3):9-12. PubMed ID: 11656915
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
38. Neurobiological research involving human subjects: perspectives from the Office for Protection from Research Risks.
Puglisi JT; Ellis GB
Account Res; 1996; 4(3-4):261-5. PubMed ID: 11654521
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
39. All is not well in research on human subjects.
Goldman J
N Y Times Web; 1986 Mar; ():A26. PubMed ID: 11647822
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
40. Why HHS should reconsider its proposed exemption for social policy experiments.
Abram MB;
IRB; 1982 May; 4(5):10-2. PubMed ID: 11649408
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
[Previous] [Next] [New Search]
