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 *

103 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 20122115)

  • 1. Risk communication for nanobiotechnology: to whom, about what, and why?
    Priest SH
    J Law Med Ethics; 2009; 37(4):759-69. PubMed ID: 20122115
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Developing U.S. oversight strategies for nanobiotechnology: learning from past oversight experiences.
    Paradise J; Wolf SM; Kuzma J; Kuzhabekova A; Tisdale AW; Kokkoli E; Ramachandran G
    J Law Med Ethics; 2009; 37(4):688-705. PubMed ID: 20122110
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Evaluating oversight systems for emerging technologies: a case study of genetically engineered organisms.
    Kuzma J; Najmaie P; Larson J
    J Law Med Ethics; 2009; 37(4):546-86. PubMed ID: 20122100
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Problem formulation and option assessment (PFOA) linking governance and environmental risk assessment for technologies: a methodology for problem analysis of nanotechnologies and genetically engineered organisms.
    Nelson KC; Andow DA; Banker MJ
    J Law Med Ethics; 2009; 37(4):732-48. PubMed ID: 20122113
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Introduction: The challenge of developing oversight approaches to nanobiotechnology.
    Paradise J; Wolf SM; Kuzma J; Ramachandran G; Kokkoli E
    J Law Med Ethics; 2009; 37(4):543-5. PubMed ID: 20122099
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Commentary: Emerging technologies oversight: research, regulation, and commercialization.
    Johnson R
    J Law Med Ethics; 2009; 37(4):587-93. PubMed ID: 20122101
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Evaluating oversight of human drugs and medical devices: a case study of the FDA and implications for nanobiotechnology.
    Paradise J; Tisdale AW; Hall RF; Kokkoli E
    J Law Med Ethics; 2009; 37(4):598-624. PubMed ID: 20122103
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Gene therapy oversight: lessons for nanobiotechnology.
    Wolf SM; Gupta R; Kohlhepp P
    J Law Med Ethics; 2009; 37(4):659-84. PubMed ID: 20122108
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Commentary: Who's afraid of the RAC? Lessons from the oversight of controversial science.
    Kahn JP
    J Law Med Ethics; 2009; 37(4):685-7. PubMed ID: 20122109
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Governance of nanotechnology and nanomaterials: principles, regulation, and renegotiating the social contract.
    Kimbrell GA
    J Law Med Ethics; 2009; 37(4):706-23. PubMed ID: 20122111
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Review of the OSHA framework for oversight of occupational environments.
    Choi JY; Ramachandran G
    J Law Med Ethics; 2009; 37(4):633-50. PubMed ID: 20122106
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. What does the history of technology regulation teach us about nano oversight?
    Marchant GE; Sylvester DJ; Abbott KW
    J Law Med Ethics; 2009; 37(4):724-31. PubMed ID: 20122112
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Risk management frameworks for human health and environmental risks.
    Jardine C; Hrudey S; Shortreed J; Craig L; Krewski D; Furgal C; McColl S
    J Toxicol Environ Health B Crit Rev; 2003; 6(6):569-720. PubMed ID: 14698953
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Commentary: Is it possible to determine the extent to which informational asymmetries and prejudice bias responses?
    Hurley T
    J Law Med Ethics; 2009; 37(4):594-7. PubMed ID: 20122102
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. American Society of Clinical Oncology policy statement: oversight of clinical research.
    American Society of Clinical Oncology
    J Clin Oncol; 2003 Jun; 21(12):2377-86. PubMed ID: 12721281
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Necessity and approach to integrated nanomaterial legislation and governance.
    Wang J; Gerlach JD; Savage N; Cobb GP
    Sci Total Environ; 2013 Jan; 442():56-62. PubMed ID: 23178764
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Regulatory or regulating publics? The European Union's regulation of emerging health technologies and citizen participation.
    Flear ML; Pickersgill MD
    Med Law Rev; 2013; 21(1):39-70. PubMed ID: 23222171
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Transnational models for regulation of nanotechnology.
    Marchant GE; Sylvester DJ
    J Law Med Ethics; 2006; 34(4):714-25. PubMed ID: 17199813
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Science, ethics, and the "problems" of governing nanotechnologies.
    Hogle LF
    J Law Med Ethics; 2009; 37(4):749-58. PubMed ID: 20122114
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Are environmental regulations keeping up with innovation? A case study of the nanotechnology industry.
    Fairbrother A; Fairbrother JR
    Ecotoxicol Environ Saf; 2009 Jul; 72(5):1327-30. PubMed ID: 19423165
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 6.