158 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 12678074)
1. The forum. The challenges of cross-cultural research in the international setting.
Crosby S; Grodin MA
Ethics Behav; 2002; 12(4):371-2, 376-8. PubMed ID: 12678074
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
2. The forum. A contextualized approach to IRB review for collaborative international research.
Kelley SD
Ethics Behav; 2002; 12(4):371-6. PubMed ID: 12678073
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
3. The forum. The importance of context in international research.
Brunger F; Weijer C
Ethics Behav; 2002; 12(4):371-2, 384-7. PubMed ID: 12678077
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
4. The forum. Mistaking procedural requirements for ethical standards.
Macklin R
Ethics Behav; 2002; 12(4):371-2, 378-82. PubMed ID: 12678075
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
5. The forum. "Well, what we got here is a failure to communicate": revisiting and reviewing the reviewers of research.
Rubin SS
Ethics Behav; 2002; 12(4):371-2, 382-4. PubMed ID: 12678076
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
6. Universal ethical principles in a diverse universe: a commentary on Monshi and Zieglmayer's case study.
DuBois JM
Ethics Behav; 2004; 14(4):313-9. PubMed ID: 16625726
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Ethical oversight of research in developing countries.
Kass N; Dawson L; Loyo-Berrios NI
IRB; 2003; 25(2):1-10. PubMed ID: 12833901
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
8. The problem of privacy in transcultural research: reflections on an ethnographic study in Sri Lanka.
Monshi B; Zieglmayer V
Ethics Behav; 2004; 14(4):305-12. PubMed ID: 16622990
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Guidelines for IRB review of international collaborative medical research: a proposal.
White MT
J Law Med Ethics; 1999; 27(1):87-94. PubMed ID: 11657148
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
10. Beyond our borders: different laws, different languages. Universal ethics?
Dhai A; Lavery J
Prot Hum Subj; 2005; (12):15-7. PubMed ID: 16317860
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
11. The absolute ethical requirement of individual, informed consent: a commentary on Barrett and Parker.
Lie R
Monash Bioeth Rev; 2003 Jul; 22(3):18-22. PubMed ID: 14682317
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
12. Informed consent: some challenges to the universal validity of the Western model.
Levine RJ
Law Med Health Care; 1991; 19(3-4):207-13. PubMed ID: 1779688
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
13. The task for ethics review: should research ethics boards address an approach or a paradigm?
Nelson CH; McPherson DH
NCEHR Commun; 2004; 12(2):11-22. PubMed ID: 15460563
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
14. Ethical and regulatory challenges in a randomized control trial of adjuvant treatment for breast cancer in Vietnam.
Love RR; Fost NC
J Investig Med; 1997 Oct; 45(8):423-31. PubMed ID: 9394094
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
15. New role for institutional review boards when reviewing international projects.
Maloney DM
Hum Res Rep; 2000 Nov; 15(11):1-2. PubMed ID: 11767803
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
16. Culture, community and consent: a response to Barrett and Parker.
Zion D
Monash Bioeth Rev; 2003 Jul; 22(3):23-7. PubMed ID: 14682319
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
17. Research ethics and the "fieldwork monitoring committee".
Herrera C
IRB; 2000; 22(6):11-3. PubMed ID: 11883484
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
18. Ten questions institutional review boards should ask when reviewing international clinical research protocols.
Fitzgerald DW; Wasunna A; Pape JW
IRB; 2003; 25(2):14-8. PubMed ID: 12833903
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
19. Drug trials, doctors, and developing countries: toward a legal definition of informed consent.
Newman AM
Camb Q Healthc Ethics; 1996; 5(3):387-99. PubMed ID: 8862825
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
20. International regulations and medical research in developing countries: double standards or differing standards?
Tangwa GB
Not Polit; 2002; 18(67):46-50. PubMed ID: 15282918
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
