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 *

647 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 16036658)

  • 61. Should participation in vaccine clinical trials be mandated?
    Sheehy S; Meyer J
    Virtual Mentor; 2012 Jan; 14(1):35-8. PubMed ID: 23116915
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 62. Restrict the Recruitment of Involuntarily Committed Patients for Psychiatric Research.
    Elliott C; Lamkin M
    JAMA Psychiatry; 2016 Apr; 73(4):317-8. PubMed ID: 26864804
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 63. Response to Athula Sumathipala and Sisira Siribaddana, "Revisiting 'freely given informed consent' in relation to the developing world: the role of an Ombudsman" (AJOB 4:3).
    Simpson B
    Am J Bioeth; 2005; 5(1):W24-6. PubMed ID: 16036646
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 64. Undue inducements and reasonable risks: will the dismal science lead to dismal research ethics?
    London AJ
    Am J Bioeth; 2005; 5(5):29-32. PubMed ID: 16179305
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 65. Eschewing definitions of the therapeutic misconception: a family resemblance analysis.
    Goldberg DS
    J Med Philos; 2011 Jun; 36(3):296-320. PubMed ID: 21606116
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 66. [Ethics committees in USA--background and development. Responsible conductors of clinical trials required for risk minimization].
    Lund LH
    Lakartidningen; 2008 Jan 9-15; 105(1-2):42-4. PubMed ID: 18293746
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 67. How can valid informed consent be obtained from a psychotic patient for research into psychosis? Three perspectives.
    Freckelton I; Keks N; Howe V; Foister K; Jenkins K; Copolov D; Sullivan D
    Monash Bioeth Rev; 2003 Oct; 22(4):60-75. PubMed ID: 15069966
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 68. Ethical issues in taking neuroscience research from bench to bedside.
    Leshner AI
    Cerebrum; 2004; 6(4):66-72. PubMed ID: 15986537
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 69. Omitted considerations and populations: a response to "Should children decide whether they are enrolled in nonbeneficial research?" by David Wendler and Seema Shah (AJOB 3:4).
    Solyom AE
    Am J Bioeth; 2004; 4(1):W39-40. PubMed ID: 15035946
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 70. [Research ethics guidelines: partly different requirements in various types of trials].
    Nilstun T; Löfmark R
    Lakartidningen; 2005 Oct 10-16; 102(41):2932-4, 2937. PubMed ID: 16294510
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 71. The forum. What theological understandings contribute to protecting mentally impaired persons in medical treatment and research.
    McKenzie DM
    Ethics Behav; 2002; 12(3):279-80, 287-90. PubMed ID: 12656074
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 72. Consent and assent to participate in research from people with dementia.
    Slaughter S; Cole D; Jennings E; Reimer MA
    Nurs Ethics; 2007 Jan; 14(1):27-40. PubMed ID: 17334168
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 73. Nice work if you can get it.
    Reid L
    Am J Bioeth; 2005; 5(5):27-9. PubMed ID: 16179304
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 74. The case for evidence-based rulemaking in human subjects research.
    Sachs B
    Am J Bioeth; 2010 Jun; 10(6):3-13. PubMed ID: 20526958
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 75. Research participation and financial inducements.
    Resnik DB
    Am J Bioeth; 2001; 1(2):54-6. PubMed ID: 11951894
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 76. End-stage heart disease, high-risk research, and competence to consent: the case of the AbioCor artificial heart.
    Morreim EH
    Perspect Biol Med; 2006; 49(1):19-34. PubMed ID: 16489274
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 77. Justice and research design: the case for a semi-randomization clinical trial.
    Veatch RM
    Clin Res; 1983 Feb; 31(1):12-22. PubMed ID: 10299203
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 78. A challenging case: how should an IRB rule when a protocol calls for using an extremely vulnerable population: the dying?
    Agich G; Smith D; Levine R
    Prot Hum Subj; 2005; (12):5-6. PubMed ID: 16317856
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 79. Authorizing psychiatric research: principles, practices and problems.
    Chong SA; Huxtable R; Campbell A
    Bioethics; 2011 Jan; 25(1):27-36. PubMed ID: 19659857
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 80. [Medical research and vulnerable subjects: unemployed people].
    Niebrój L
    Przegl Lek; 2006; 63(8):715-8. PubMed ID: 17441390
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 33.