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.
162 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 20579252)
1. Overseeing innovative therapy without mistaking it for research: a function-based model based on old truths, new capacities, and lessons from stem cells. Taylor PL J Law Med Ethics; 2010; 38(2):286-302. PubMed ID: 20579252 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Allowing innovative stem cell-based therapies outside of clinical trials: ethical and policy challenges. Hyun I J Law Med Ethics; 2010; 38(2):277-85. PubMed ID: 20579251 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Protecting subjects without hampering research progress: guidance from the office for human research protections. Schwetz BA Cleve Clin J Med; 2007 Mar; 74 Suppl 2():S60-2; discussion S68-9. PubMed ID: 17469475 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Protecting research subjects--what must be done. Shalala D N Engl J Med; 2000 Sep; 343(11):808-10. PubMed ID: 10984573 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
5. The impact of escalating regulatory requirements on the conduct of clinical research. Gordon BG; Kessinger A; Mann SL; Prentice ED Cytotherapy; 2003; 5(4):309-13. PubMed ID: 12944237 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Research involving children: regulations, review boards and reform. Gandhi R J Health Care Law Policy; 2005; 8(2):264-330. PubMed ID: 16471026 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
7. The basics of human subjects protection. Yoder LH Medsurg Nurs; 2006 Apr; 15(2):95-8; quiz 99. PubMed ID: 16700248 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
8. 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]
9. Extend the reach of institutional review boards first, then strengthen their depth. Spike J Am J Bioeth; 2008 Nov; 8(11):11-2. PubMed ID: 19061097 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
10. Translating stem cell research: challenges at the research frontier. Magnus D J Law Med Ethics; 2010; 38(2):267-76. PubMed ID: 20579250 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Revisiting the Ethics of Research on Human Subjects. Tsay C AMA J Ethics; 2015 Dec; 17(12):1105-7. PubMed ID: 27086370 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
12. The flip of the coin: exempt, expedited, or full IRB review? Bliss-Holtz J AACN Adv Crit Care; 2007; 18(2):213-7. PubMed ID: 17473550 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
13. Stem-cell-derived products: an FDA update. Moos M Trends Pharmacol Sci; 2008 Dec; 29(12):591-3. PubMed ID: 18937983 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Trials and tribulations: an expose of the HPV vaccine trials by the 72nd Parliamentary Standing Committee Report. Sarojini N; Deepa V Indian J Med Ethics; 2013; 10(4):220-2. PubMed ID: 24152343 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
15. Conflict of interest in human subjects research. Groeger JS; Barnes M Crit Care Med; 2003 Mar; 31(3 Suppl):S137-42. PubMed ID: 12626959 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
17. Current issues in clinical research and the development of new pharmaceuticals. Goldhammer A Account Res; 2001; 8(4):283-91. PubMed ID: 12481798 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. The paradoxical problem with multiple-IRB review. Menikoff J N Engl J Med; 2010 Oct; 363(17):1591-3. PubMed ID: 20942660 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
20. Bioethical malpractice: risk and responsibilities in human research. Noah BA J Health Care Law Policy; 2004; 7(2):175-241. PubMed ID: 15573441 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [Next] [New Search]