These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


BIOMARKERS

Molecular Biopsy of Human Tumors

- a resource for Precision Medicine *

144 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 12757991)

  • 1. The effects of local review on informed consent documents from a multicenter clinical trials consortium.
    Burman W; Breese P; Weis S; Bock N; Bernardo J; Vernon A;
    Control Clin Trials; 2003 Jun; 24(3):245-55. PubMed ID: 12757991
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Consent form heterogeneity in cancer trials: the cooperative group and institutional review board gap.
    Koyfman SA; Agre P; Carlisle R; Classen L; Cheatham C; Finley JP; Kuhrik N; Kuhrik M; Mangskau TK; O'Neill J; Reddy CP; Kodish E; McCabe MS
    J Natl Cancer Inst; 2013 Jul; 105(13):947-53. PubMed ID: 23821757
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Are research participants truly informed? Readability of informed consent forms used in research.
    Ogloff JR; Otto RK
    Ethics Behav; 1991; 1(4):239-52. PubMed ID: 11651140
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Are informed consent forms that describe clinical oncology research protocols readable by most patients and their families?
    Grossman SA; Piantadosi S; Covahey C
    J Clin Oncol; 1994 Oct; 12(10):2211-5. PubMed ID: 7931491
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. American Society of Clinical Oncology policy statement: oversight of clinical research.
    American Society of Clinical Oncology
    J Clin Oncol; 2003 Jun; 21(12):2377-86. PubMed ID: 12721281
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Institutional Review Board (IRB) review lacks impact on the readability of consent forms for research.
    Hammerschmidt DE; Keane MA
    Am J Med Sci; 1992 Dec; 304(6):348-51. PubMed ID: 1456273
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Consent documents for oncology trials: does anybody read these things?
    Sharp SM
    Am J Clin Oncol; 2004 Dec; 27(6):570-5. PubMed ID: 15577434
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Informed consent for research: a study to evaluate readability and processability to effect change.
    Philipson SJ; Doyle MA; Gabram SG; Nightingale C; Philipson EH
    J Investig Med; 1995 Oct; 43(5):459-67. PubMed ID: 8528757
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Readability of informed consent forms for research in a Veterans Administration medical center.
    Baker MT; Taub HA
    JAMA; 1983 Nov; 250(19):2646-8. PubMed ID: 6632164
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Readability standards for informed-consent forms as compared with actual readability.
    Paasche-Orlow MK; Taylor HA; Brancati FL
    N Engl J Med; 2003 Feb; 348(8):721-6. PubMed ID: 12594317
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. General provisional proxy consent to research: redefining the role of the local research ethics board.
    Pullman D
    IRB; 1999; 21(3):1-10. PubMed ID: 11657876
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. The efficiency of single institutional review board review in National Institute of Child Health and Human Development Cooperative Reproductive Medicine Network-initiated clinical trials.
    Diamond MP; Eisenberg E; Huang H; Coutifaris C; Legro RS; Hansen KR; Steiner AZ; Cedars M; Barnhart K; Ziolek T; Thomas TR; Maurer K; Krawetz SA; Wild RA; Trussell JC; Santoro N; Zhang H;
    Clin Trials; 2019 Feb; 16(1):3-10. PubMed ID: 30354458
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Variation in standards of research compensation and child assent practices: a comparison of 69 institutional review board-approved informed permission and assent forms for 3 multicenter pediatric clinical trials.
    Kimberly MB; Hoehn KS; Feudtner C; Nelson RM; Schreiner M
    Pediatrics; 2006 May; 117(5):1706-11. PubMed ID: 16651328
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Variability among institutional review boards' decisions within the context of a multicenter trial.
    Silverman H; Hull SC; Sugarman J
    Crit Care Med; 2001 Feb; 29(2):235-41. PubMed ID: 11246299
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Time to institutional review board approval with local versus central review in a multicenter pragmatic trial.
    Neuman MD; Gaskins LJ; Ziolek T;
    Clin Trials; 2018 Feb; 15(1):107-111. PubMed ID: 28982261
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Consent form readability in university-sponsored research.
    Goldstein AO; Frasier P; Curtis P; Reid A; Kreher NE
    J Fam Pract; 1996 Jun; 42(6):606-11. PubMed ID: 8656172
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Analysis of the Nature of IRB Contingencies Required for Informed Consent Document Approval.
    Blackwood RA; Maio RF; Mrdjenovich AJ; VandenBosch TM; Gordon PS; Shipman EL; Hamilton TA
    Account Res; 2015; 22(4):237-45. PubMed ID: 25897768
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Readability and Content Assessment of Informed Consent Forms for Phase II-IV Clinical Trials in China.
    Wen G; Liu X; Huang L; Shu J; Xu N; Chen R; Huang Z; Yang G; Wang X; Xiang Y; Lu Y; Yuan H
    PLoS One; 2016; 11(10):e0164251. PubMed ID: 27701471
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Consent forms: how to determine and improve their readability.
    Meade CD; Howser DM
    Oncol Nurs Forum; 1992; 19(10):1523-8. PubMed ID: 1461766
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Issues for research ethics committees: third installment.
    Evans D; Crossland N; Graham I; Preece A
    Bull Med Ethics; 1998 Feb; No. 135():13-6. PubMed ID: 11657246
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 8.