238 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 11917931)
1. OPRR issues final findings in its investigation of university.
Maloney DM
Hum Res Rep; 2000 May; 15(5):5-6. PubMed ID: 11917931
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
2. Evaluation of human subject protections in schizophrenia research conducted by the University of ... (Part I).
Maloney DM
Hum Res Rep; 1999 Nov; 14(11):5-6. PubMed ID: 12194197
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
3. Institutional review board (IRB) violated numerous regulations.
Maloney DM
Hum Res Rep; 2001 Feb; 16(2):7-8. PubMed ID: 12530381
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
4. Parents say federal agency helps protect researchers from more than their subjects.
Maloney DM
Hum Res Rep; 2000 Oct; 15(10):5-6. PubMed ID: 11913435
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
5. "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]
6. University admits research proceeded without review by an institutional review board (IRB).
Maloney DM
Hum Res Rep; 2003 Apr; 18(4):6-7. PubMed ID: 14603944
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
7. University later admits that regulations were not followed.
Maloney DM
Hum Res Rep; 2002 Feb; 17(2):6-7. PubMed ID: 12374176
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
8. Subjects must have access to treatment and research records.
Maloney DM
Hum Res Rep; 2000 Jun; 15(6):5-6. PubMed ID: 11917939
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
9. University failed to have adequate IRB policies and procedures in place.
Maloney DM
Hum Res Rep; 2002 Mar; 17(3):6-7. PubMed ID: 12408153
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
10. New human subject protection regulations are being delayed.
Maloney DM
Hum Res Rep; 2005 Jan; 20(1):1-2. PubMed ID: 15810181
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
11. Institutional review boards (IRBs) failed to use steps to protect vulnerable research subjects.
Maloney DM
Hum Res Rep; 2003 Jun; 18(6):6-7. PubMed ID: 15119342
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
12. University denies that it failed to comply with special rule for subjects who are prisoners.
Maloney DM
Hum Res Rep; 2002 Jan; 17(1):6-7. PubMed ID: 16270439
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
13. Final rule on additional protections for women.
Maloney DM
Hum Res Rep; 2002 Jan; 17(1):3. PubMed ID: 16270436
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
14. Resuscitation research and consent: ethical and practical issues.
Bircher NG
Crit Care Med; 2003 May; 31(5 Suppl):S379-84. PubMed ID: 12771587
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
15. Protecting human research subjects: ten common problems.
Puglisi T
Health Law News; 2000 Jun; 13(3):8, 15. PubMed ID: 12542046
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
16. Institutional review boards, research on children, and informed consent of parents: walking the tightrope between encouraging vital experimentation and protecting subjects' rights.
Katerberg RJ
J Coll Univ Law; 1998; 24(3):545-79. PubMed ID: 16331880
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
17. Subject's parents claim university was not responsive to their requests.
Maloney DM
Hum Res Rep; 2000 Sep; 15(9):5-6. PubMed ID: 11917938
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
18. Protecting research subjects--what must be done.
Shalala D
N Engl J Med; 2000 Sep; 343(11):808-10. PubMed ID: 10984573
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
19. University's Multiple Project Assurance (MPA) could be renewed for only short periods of time.
Maloney DM
Hum Res Rep; 2000 Jul; 15(7):5-6. PubMed ID: 12199226
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
20. Informed consent to human subject research: improving the process of obtaining informed consent from mentally ill persons.
Derrickson D
Fordham Urban Law J; 1997; 25(1):143-65. PubMed ID: 12173638
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
