205 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 16794524)
1. Hematopoietic stem cell transplant research with pediatric donors: when can institutional review boards approve it?
Peerzada JM; Wendler D
Transplantation; 2006 Jun; 81(12):1616-20. PubMed ID: 16794524
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Minimal risk in pediatric research as a function of age.
Wendler D
Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med; 2009 Feb; 163(2):115-8. PubMed ID: 19188642
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Weighing the risks of G-CSF administration, leukopheresis, and standard marrow harvest: ethical and safety considerations for normal pediatric hematopoietic cell donors.
Pulsipher MA; Nagler A; Iannone R; Nelson RM
Pediatr Blood Cancer; 2006 Apr; 46(4):422-33. PubMed ID: 16411207
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Deputizing institutional review boards to police (audit?) biomedical research.
Noah L
J Leg Med; 2004 Sep; 25(3):267-93; discussion 295-301. PubMed ID: 15620048
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
5. A study of warning letters issued to institutional review boards by the United States Food and Drug Administration.
Bramstedt KA; Kassimatis K
Clin Invest Med; 2004 Dec; 27(6):316-23. PubMed ID: 15675112
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Health service research: the square peg in human subjects protection regulations.
Gittner LS; Roach MJ; Kikano G; Grey S; Dawson NV
J Med Ethics; 2011 Feb; 37(2):118-22. PubMed ID: 21071571
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Institutional review board guidance on pediatric research: missed opportunities.
Wolf LE; Zandecki J; Lo B
J Pediatr; 2005 Jul; 147(1):84-9. PubMed ID: 16027701
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Institutional review boards and financial conflicts of interest.
Maloney DM
Hum Res Rep; 2002 Feb; 17(2):1-2. PubMed ID: 12374174
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
9. Research involving pediatric stem cell donors: A way forward.
Wendler D; Shah NN; Pulsipher MA; Fry T; Grady C
Clin Trials; 2016 Jun; 13(3):304-10. PubMed ID: 26908544
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Cell-based interventions for neurologic conditions: ethical challenges for early human trials.
Mathews DJ; Sugarman J; Bok H; Blass DM; Coyle JT; Duggan P; Finkel J; Greely HT; Hillis A; Hoke A; Johnson R; Johnston M; Kahn J; Kerr D; Kurtzberg J; Liao SM; McDonald JW; McKhann G; Nelson KB; Rao M; Regenberg A; Siegel AW; Smith K; Solter D; Song H; Vescovi A; Young W; Gearhart JD; Faden R
Neurology; 2008 Jul; 71(4):288-93. PubMed ID: 18463365
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Risks and benefits of pediatric bone marrow donation: a critical need for research.
Weisz V; Robbennolt JK
Behav Sci Law; 1996; 14(4):375-91. PubMed ID: 9156419
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Institutional review boards, research on children, and informed consent of parents: walking the tightrope between encouraging vital experimentation and protecting subjects' rights.
Katerberg RJ
J Coll Univ Law; 1998; 24(3):545-79. PubMed ID: 16331880
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
13. Minimal risk in pediatric research.
Wendler D; Varma S
J Pediatr; 2006 Dec; 149(6):855-61. PubMed ID: 17137907
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
14. Determination of Eligibility in Related Pediatric Hematopoietic Cell Donors: Ethical and Clinical Considerations. Recommendations from a Working Group of the Worldwide Network for Blood and Marrow Transplantation Association.
Bitan M; van Walraven SM; Worel N; Ball LM; Styczynski J; Torrabadella M; Witt V; Shaw BE; Seber A; Yabe H; Greinix HT; Peters C; Gluckman E; Rocha V; Halter J; Pulsipher MA
Biol Blood Marrow Transplant; 2016 Jan; 22(1):96-103. PubMed ID: 26307344
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Institutional review boards (IRBs) and risk considerations for children.
Maloney DM
Hum Res Rep; 2004 Sep; 19(9):1-3. PubMed ID: 15675081
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
16. [Collection of hematopoietic progenitor cells from healthy donors].
Bojanić I; Cepulić BG; Mazić S
Acta Med Croatica; 2009 Jun; 63(3):237-44. PubMed ID: 19827352
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Medical research oversight from the corporate governance perspective: comparing institutional review boards and corporate boards.
Saver RS
William Mary Law Rev; 2004 Nov; 46(2):619-730. PubMed ID: 17167924
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
18. Phase I research and the meaning of direct benefit.
Ross L
J Pediatr; 2006 Jul; 149(1 Suppl):S20-4. PubMed ID: 16829237
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Harmonizing regulations for biomedical research: a critical analysis of the US and Venezuelan systems.
Di Tillio-Gonzalez D; Fischbach RL
Dev World Bioeth; 2008 Dec; 8(3):167-77. PubMed ID: 17488491
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Interpretation of the subjects' condition requirement: a legal perspective.
Shah S; Wendler D
J Law Med Ethics; 2010; 38(2):365-73. PubMed ID: 20579233
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
