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.
2. Beyond Moore: issues of law and policy impacting human cell and genetic research in the age of biotechnology. Hartman RG J Leg Med; 1993 Sep; 14(3):463-77. PubMed ID: 7779167 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
3. Whose waste is it anyway? The case of John Moore. Annas GJ Hastings Cent Rep; 1988; 18(5):37-9. PubMed ID: 3066788 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Patient autonomy and biomedical research: judicial compromise in Moore v. Regents of the University of California. LoBiondo AR Albany Law J Sci Technol; 1991; 1():277-305. PubMed ID: 16281328 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
5. Moore v. Regents of the University of California: expanded disclosure, limited property rights. Potts J Northwest Univ Law Rev; 1992; 86(2):453-96. PubMed ID: 11659500 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
6. Moore v. Regents of the University of California. California. Court of Appeal, Second District, Division 4 Wests Calif Report; 1988 Jul; 249():494-540. PubMed ID: 11648571 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Profiting from patient tissue: can patients lay claim to profits from products derived from their tissues? Med World News; 1985 Jun; 26(11):63. PubMed ID: 11645555 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
9. Recognizing property interests in bodily tissues. A need for legislative guidance. Parker PM J Leg Med; 1989 Jun; 10(2):357-75. PubMed ID: 2760536 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
11. Moore v. Regents of the University of California: patients, property rights, and public policy. Biagi KG St Louis Univ Law J; 1991; 35(2):433-62. PubMed ID: 16144099 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
12. Proprietary rights in body parts: the relevance of Moore's case in Australia. Mortimer D Monash Univ Law Rev; 1993; 19(1):217-25. PubMed ID: 17333577 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
13. Moore v. The Regents of the University of California: an ethical debate on informed consent and property rights in a patient's cells. Prowda JB J Pat Trademark Off Soc; 1995 Aug; 77(8):611-39. PubMed ID: 11658094 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
14. Ethical considerations in informed consent for potential future use of human tissue samples. Adams M; Prentice ED; Oki GS IRB; 1996; 18(2):6-7. PubMed ID: 11654756 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
15. Patient sues for title to own cells. Blakeslee S Nature; 1984 Sep 20-26; 311(5983):198. PubMed ID: 6090923 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. My body, my property. Andrews LB Hastings Cent Rep; 1986 Oct; 16(5):28-38. PubMed ID: 3771198 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Controlling conflicts of interest in the doctor-patient relationship: lessons from Moore v. Regents of the University of California. Healey JM; Dowling KL Mercer Law Rev; 1991; 42(3):989-1005. PubMed ID: 11651440 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
18. Living tissue and organ donors and property law: more on Moore. Dickens BM J Contemp Health Law Policy; 1992; 8():73-93. PubMed ID: 10183665 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
19. Source compensation for tissues and cells used in biotechnical research: why a source shouldn't share in the profits. Dillon TP Notre Dame Law Rev; 1989; 64(4):628-45. PubMed ID: 11650898 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
20. Biotechnology: a challenge for Hippocrates. Huynen S Auckl Univ Law Rev; 1991; 6(4):534-51. PubMed ID: 16127862 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [Next] [New Search]