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 *

179 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 18507315)

  • 1. The good-subject effect: investigating participant demand characteristics.
    Nichols AL; Maner JK
    J Gen Psychol; 2008 Apr; 135(2):151-65. PubMed ID: 18507315
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Ethical issues in the qualitative researcher--participant relationship.
    Eide P; Kahn D
    Nurs Ethics; 2008 Mar; 15(2):199-207. PubMed ID: 18272610
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Whatever happens in the laboratory stays in the laboratory: the prevalence and prevention of participant crosstalk.
    Edlund JE; Sagarin BJ; Skowronski JJ; Johnson SJ; Kutter J
    Pers Soc Psychol Bull; 2009 May; 35(5):635-42. PubMed ID: 19234298
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Assuring ethical treatment of students as research participants.
    Ridley RT
    J Nurs Educ; 2009 Oct; 48(10):537-41. PubMed ID: 19645366
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. The adolescent research participant: strategies for productive and ethical interviewing.
    Mack R; Giarelli E; Bernhardt BA
    J Pediatr Nurs; 2009 Dec; 24(6):448-57. PubMed ID: 19931142
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Recruiting participants in end-of-life research.
    Kirchhoff KT; Kehl KA
    Am J Hosp Palliat Care; 2007 Dec-2008 Jan; 24(6):515-21. PubMed ID: 17601835
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Adopting a constructivist approach to grounded theory: implications for research design.
    Mills J; Bonner A; Francis K
    Int J Nurs Pract; 2006 Feb; 12(1):8-13. PubMed ID: 16403191
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Reflexivity and minimization of the impact of age-cohort differences between researcher and research participants.
    Underwood M; Satterthwait LD; Bartlett HP
    Qual Health Res; 2010 Nov; 20(11):1585-95. PubMed ID: 20479134
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. The ethical community consultation model as preparation for nursing research: a case study.
    Freysteinson WM
    Nurs Ethics; 2010 Nov; 17(6):749-58. PubMed ID: 21097973
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Essentials of research ethics for healthcare professionals.
    Aita M; Richer MC
    Nurs Health Sci; 2005 Jun; 7(2):119-25. PubMed ID: 15877688
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Informed consent: views from Karachi.
    Jafarey A
    East Mediterr Health J; 2006; 12 Suppl 1():S50-5. PubMed ID: 17037689
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Deceived versus nondeceived participants' perceptions of scientific and applied psychology.
    Soliday E; Stanton AL
    Ethics Behav; 1995; 5(1):87-104. PubMed ID: 11654172
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. You have to make something of all that rubbish, do you? An empirical investigation of the social process of qualitative research.
    Carter SM; Jordens CF; McGrath C; Little M
    Qual Health Res; 2008 Sep; 18(9):1264-76. PubMed ID: 18689538
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Toward critical research ethics: transforming ethical conduct in qualitative health care research.
    Hofman NG
    Health Care Women Int; 2004 Aug; 25(7):647-62. PubMed ID: 15487483
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Conceptual, holistic, and pragmatic considerations for interviewing research participants.
    Gardner MR
    Holist Nurs Pract; 2010; 24(3):148-57. PubMed ID: 20421755
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Effects of researcher follow-up of distressed subjects: tradeoff between validity and ethical responsibility.
    Stanton AL; Burker EJ; Kershaw D
    Ethics Behav; 1991; 1(2):105-12. PubMed ID: 11653073
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. What do researchers say? What do subjects hear? Not what they would like to hear. What do subjects need? More information.
    McMillan G
    Prot Hum Subj; 2005; (12):10-1. PubMed ID: 16317858
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. [Phenomenology: a scientific approach to lived experiences].
    Ribau C; Lasry JC; Bouchard L; Moutel G; Hervé C; Marc-Vergnes JP
    Rech Soins Infirm; 2005 Jun; (81):21-7. PubMed ID: 16008134
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Reflections on the researcher-participant relationship and the ethics of dialogue.
    Yassour-Borochowitz D
    Ethics Behav; 2004; 14(2):175-86. PubMed ID: 15835040
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Toward understanding in postmodern interview analysis: interpreting the contradictory remarks of a research participant.
    Power EM
    Qual Health Res; 2004 Jul; 14(6):858-65. PubMed ID: 15200804
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 9.