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 *

128 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 20229405)

  • 1. Examining the potential for exploitation by local intermediaries.
    Landy DC; Sharp RR
    Am J Bioeth; 2010 Mar; 10(3):12-3. PubMed ID: 20229405
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Protecting the subject: PDR and the potential for compromised consent.
    Phillips T
    Am J Bioeth; 2010 Mar; 10(3):14-5. PubMed ID: 20229406
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Ethical implications of peer-driven recruitment: guidelines from public health research.
    Fry CL
    Am J Bioeth; 2010 Mar; 10(3):16-7. PubMed ID: 20229407
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Response to open peer commentaries on "Community members as recruiters of human subjects: ethical considerations".
    Simon C; Mosavel M
    Am J Bioeth; 2010 Mar; 10(3):W1-3. PubMed ID: 20229401
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Betwixt & between: peer recruiter proximity in community-based research.
    Bean S; Silva DS
    Am J Bioeth; 2010 Mar; 10(3):18-9. PubMed ID: 20229408
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Disentangling methodologies: the ethics of traditional sampling methodologies, community-based participatory research, and respondent-driven sampling.
    Constantine M
    Am J Bioeth; 2010 Mar; 10(3):22-4. PubMed ID: 20229410
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. The role of community-based organizations in the recruitment of human subjects: ethical considerations.
    Anderson EE
    Am J Bioeth; 2010 Mar; 10(3):20-1. PubMed ID: 20229409
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Community members employed on research projects face crucial, often under-recognized, ethical dilemmas.
    Molyneux S; Kamuya D; Marsh V
    Am J Bioeth; 2010 Mar; 10(3):24-6. PubMed ID: 20229411
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Community members as recruiters of human subjects: ethical considerations.
    Simon C; Mosavel M
    Am J Bioeth; 2010 Mar; 10(3):3-11. PubMed ID: 20229402
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Ethical challenges in a randomized controlled trial of peer education among veterans service organizations.
    Whittle J; Fletcher KE; Morzinski J; Ertl K; Patterson L; Jensen W; Schapira MM
    J Empir Res Hum Res Ethics; 2010 Dec; 5(4):43-51. PubMed ID: 21133786
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Improving subject recruitment by maintaining truly informed consent: a practical benefit of disclosing adverse clinical trial results.
    Shah KR; Batzer FR
    Am J Bioeth; 2009 Aug; 9(8):36-7. PubMed ID: 19998157
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Culture clash on consent.
    Nat Neurosci; 2010 Jul; 13(7):777. PubMed ID: 20581808
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Guest Editorial: A call for contextualized bioethics: health, biomedical research, and security.
    Sutrop M; Simm K
    Camb Q Healthc Ethics; 2011 Oct; 20(4):511-3. PubMed ID: 21843381
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. 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]  

  • 15. How not to rethink research ethics.
    Beauchamp TL
    Am J Bioeth; 2005; 5(1):31-3; author reply W15-8. PubMed ID: 16036653
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Response to Athula Sumathipala and Sisira Siribaddana, "Revisiting 'freely given informed consent' in relation to the developing world: the role of an Ombudsman" (AJOB 4:3).
    Simpson B
    Am J Bioeth; 2005; 5(1):W24-6. PubMed ID: 16036646
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Uniqueness, exploitation, and relative risk standards in adolescent research.
    Malek J
    Am J Bioeth; 2011 Jun; 11(6):23-5. PubMed ID: 21678211
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. A relative standard for minimal risk is unnecessary and potentially harmful to children: lessons from the Phambili trial.
    Nelson RM
    Am J Bioeth; 2011 Jun; 11(6):14-6. PubMed ID: 21678206
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Response to Open Peer Commentaries on "Relative versus absolute standards for everyday risk in adolescent HIV prevention trials: expanding the debate".
    Snyder J; Miller CL; Gray G
    Am J Bioeth; 2011 Jun; 11(6):W1-3. PubMed ID: 21678202
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Respondent burden in clinical research: when are we asking too much of subjects?
    Ulrich CM; Wallen GR; Feister A; Grady C
    IRB; 2005; 27(4):17-20. PubMed ID: 16220630
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 7.