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.
43. Protection of human subjects: first biennial report on the adequacy and uniformity of federal rules and policies, and their implementation for the protection of human subjects in biomedical and behavioral research; Report of the President's Commission for the Study of Ethical Problems in Medicine and Biomedical and Behavioral Research. Department of Health and Human Services. Notice of report for public comment. Fed Regist; 1982 Mar; 47(60):13272-305. PubMed ID: 10298467 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
44. Federal investigation concludes that institutional review boards are in trouble. Maloney DM Hum Res Rep; 1998 Aug; 13(8):1-2. PubMed ID: 11657190 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
45. New initiative to accredit all institutional review boards. Maloney DM Hum Res Rep; 1999 Jul; 14(7):1-2. PubMed ID: 11658058 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
46. Research ethics in Internet-enabled research: human subjects issues and methodological myopia. Walther JB Ethics Inf Technol; 2002; 4():205-16. PubMed ID: 15977362 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
47. A step toward truly protecting human subjects: reviewing the review boards. Albrecht RR Am J Bioeth; 2004; 4(1):54-5. PubMed ID: 15035952 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
48. Vulnerability in research: a developmental perspective on research risk. Thompson RA Child Dev; 1990 Feb; 61(1):1-16. PubMed ID: 2307031 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
50. Assessing the ethics of ethics research: a case study. Miller FG; Wendler D IRB; 2004; 26(2):9-12. PubMed ID: 15069971 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
51. National commission proposes numerous new regulations of institutional review boards. Maloney DM Hum Res Rep; 1998 Oct; 13(10):1-2. PubMed ID: 11657739 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
52. Interviews that do not require review by IRBs. Maloney DM Hum Res Rep; 2003 Dec; 18(12):3. PubMed ID: 15027430 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
53. Protecting human subjects of research: an analysis of proposed amendments to HEW policy. de Sola Pool I PS (Wash DC); 1979; 12(4):452-5. PubMed ID: 11649394 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
54. Toward a more comprehensive approach to protecting human subjects: the interface of data safety monitoring boards and institutional review boards in randomized clinical trials. Gordon VM; Sugarman J; Kass N IRB; 1998; 20(1):1-5. PubMed ID: 11655324 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
55. Empirically supported ethical research practice: the costs and benefits of research from the participants' view. Newman E; Willard T; Sinclair R; Kaloupek D Account Res; 2001; 8(4):309-29. PubMed ID: 12481796 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
56. Ethics Regulation in Social Computing Research: Examining the Role of Institutional Review Boards. Vitak J; Proferes N; Shilton K; Ashktorab Z J Empir Res Hum Res Ethics; 2017 Dec; 12(5):372-382. PubMed ID: 28831844 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
57. 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]
58. Empirical ethics, context-sensitivity, and contextualism. Musschenga AW J Med Philos; 2005 Oct; 30(5):467-90. PubMed ID: 16282140 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
59. Ethics by opinion poll? The functions of attitudes research for normative deliberations in medical ethics. Salloch S; Vollmann J; Schildmann J J Med Ethics; 2014 Sep; 40(9):597-602. PubMed ID: 23632008 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
60. Giving voice to research participants: should IRBs hear from research participant representatives? Hadskis MR Account Res; 2007; 14(3):155-77. PubMed ID: 17877106 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related] [Previous] [Next] [New Search]