129 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 16334911)
1. Research: history repeats itself.
Srinivasan S; Pai SA
Issues Med Ethics; 2001; 9(4):108. PubMed ID: 16334911
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
2. A review of OHRP compliance oversight letters.
Borror K; Carome M; McNeilly P; Weil C
IRB; 2003; 25(5):1-4. PubMed ID: 14870724
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
3. Modern medical research ethics.
Tranøy KE
Scand J Prim Health Care Suppl; 1993 Sep; 11(3):161-2. PubMed ID: 11654192
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
4. Out of sight, out of mind: how Harvard University exploited rural Chinese villagers for their DNA.
Keim B
Genewatch; 2003; 16(5):10-1. PubMed ID: 15025121
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
5. Secret human experiments test trust in government.
Guttman D
Forum Appl Res Public Policy; 1997; 12(3):109-14. PubMed ID: 12962097
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
6. Questionable experiments, muddled defence.
Kuhse H; Singer P
Bioethics; 1994 Oct; 8(4):iii-. PubMed ID: 11654120
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
7. Beyond compliance...is it too much to ask?
Koski G
IRB; 2003; 25(5):5-6. PubMed ID: 14870726
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
8. Pediatric ethics and early-phase childhood cancer research: conflicted goals and the prospect of benefit.
Kodish E
Account Res; 2003; 10(1):17-25. PubMed ID: 14552299
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
9. Institutional conflicts of interest and research with human subjects.
Maloney DM
Hum Res Rep; 2003 Feb; 18(2):1-2. PubMed ID: 12814111
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
10. US university finds scientist flouted rules for clinical trials.
Kumar S
Lancet; 2001 Nov; 358(9295):1791. PubMed ID: 11734253
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
11. When good institutions behave badly.
Murphy TF
Chron High Educ; 2003 Dec; 50(17):B15. PubMed ID: 15287139
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
12. Human experimentation at the brink of life.
Oliver AA
GMU Law Rev; 2001; 9(4):1177-203. PubMed ID: 15233133
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
13. Case study: agency says institutional review board (IRB) did not fulfill duties so agency investigation expands.
Maloney DM
Hum Res Rep; 2006 Apr; 21(4):6-7. PubMed ID: 16832919
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
14. Informed consent in research.
Perry C
Natl Forum; 1999; 79(3):22-5. PubMed ID: 12455549
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Research on hire.
Gupta AS
Issues Med Ethics; 2001; 9(4):111-3. PubMed ID: 16334912
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
16. Research halted at Indian centre accused of misconduct.
Sharma DC
Lancet; 2001 Sep; 358(9286):992. PubMed ID: 11583767
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
17. Protecting the rights of pediatric research subjects in the International Conference on Harmonisation of Technical Requirements for Registration of Pharmaceuticals for Human Use.
Ryan AE
Fordham Int Law J; 2000 Mar; 23(3):848-934. PubMed ID: 16523592
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
18. New federal guidance adds duties for institutional review boards (IRBs).
Maloney DM
Hum Res Rep; 2005 Nov; 20(11):1-2. PubMed ID: 16358479
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
19. Phase I cancer trials: therapeutic research?
Wells RJ
Hastings Cent Rep; 2001; 31(1):4; author reply 5. PubMed ID: 11478096
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
20. Research misconduct--an indictment and possible solution.
Uffelmann H
Bioethics Forum; 2000; 16(4):13-22. PubMed ID: 11902180
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
