513 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 15027429)
1. HIPAA and what institutional review boards (IRBs) do not have to review.
Maloney DM
Hum Res Rep; 2003 Dec; 18(12):1-2. PubMed ID: 15027429
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
2. Institutional review boards and the new privacy rule.
Maloney DM
Hum Res Rep; 2001 Sep; 16(9):1-3. PubMed ID: 11833565
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
3. New privacy rule has more tasks for IRBs.
Maloney DM
Hum Res Rep; 2001 Feb; 16(2):4. PubMed ID: 12530379
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
4. Institutional review boards and the privacy of human research subjects.
Maloney DM
Hum Res Rep; 2002 Aug; 17(8):1-2. PubMed ID: 12731492
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
5. The use and disclosure of protected health information for research under the HIPAA privacy rule: unrealized patient autonomy and burdensome government regulation.
Tovino SA
S D Law Rev; 2004; 49(3):447-502. PubMed ID: 16493842
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
6. New review burdens will affect many institutional review boards (IRBs).
Maloney DM
Hum Res Rep; 2001 Jul; 16(7):9. PubMed ID: 11933956
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
7. What should IRBs consider when applying the privacy rule to research?
Gerlach JW
Kennedy Inst Ethics J; 2002 Sep; 12(3):299-303. PubMed ID: 12472082
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
8. The effect of the new federal medical-privacy rule on research.
Kulynych J; Korn D
N Engl J Med; 2002 Jan; 346(3):201-4. PubMed ID: 11796857
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
9. Balancing privacy protections with efficient research: institutional review boards and the use of certificates of confidentiality.
Currie PM
IRB; 2005; 27(5):7-12. PubMed ID: 16425475
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
10. "Exempt" research after the privacy rule.
Barnes M; Gallin KE
IRB; 2003; 25(4):5-6. PubMed ID: 14649247
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
11. Medical privacy and medical research--judging the new federal regulations.
Annas GJ
N Engl J Med; 2002 Jan; 346(3):216-20. PubMed ID: 11796863
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
12. Standards for privacy of individually identifiable health information. HIPAA implementation.
Kans Nurse; 2003 Jan; 78(1):4-11Stand. PubMed ID: 12723566
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
13. 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]
14. Bioethical malpractice: risk and responsibilities in human research.
Noah BA
J Health Care Law Policy; 2004; 7(2):175-241. PubMed ID: 15573441
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
15. Research subject privacy protection in otolaryngology.
Noone MC; Walters KC; Gillespie MB
Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg; 2004 Mar; 130(3):266-9. PubMed ID: 15023831
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Continued concern: human subject protection, the institutional review board, and continuing review.
Hoffman S
Tenn Law Rev; 2001; 68(4):725-70. PubMed ID: 16189912
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
17. Privacy bill under fire from researchers.
Wadman M
Nature; 1998 Mar; 392(6671):6. PubMed ID: 9510231
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
18. The IRB process needs to be reexamined.
Esaki R; Macario A; Harrison TK; Brock-Utne JG
Anesth Analg; 2011 May; 112(5):1249-50. PubMed ID: 21515655
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
19. State regulation of pharmaceutical clinical trials.
Gibbs JN
Food Drug Law J; 2004; 59(2):265-85. PubMed ID: 15298012
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
20. Uncovering the relationship between IRBs and the HIPAA privacy rule.
Gilles K
J AHIMA; 2004; 75(10):48-9, 52; quiz 55-6. PubMed ID: 15559839
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
