198 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 26438122)
1. Towards a balanced approach to identifying conflicts of interest faced by institutional review boards.
Kaur S; Balan S
Theor Med Bioeth; 2015 Oct; 36(5):341-61. PubMed ID: 26438122
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. 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]
3. "Members of the same club": challenges and decisions faced by US IRBs in identifying and managing conflicts of interest.
Klitzman R
PLoS One; 2011; 6(7):e22796. PubMed ID: 21829516
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Fraud, conflict of interest, and other enforcement issues in clinical research.
Sheehan JG
Cleve Clin J Med; 2007 Mar; 74 Suppl 2():S63-7; discussion S68-9. PubMed ID: 17471620
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Disclosing conflicts of interest in clinical research: views of institutional review boards, conflict of interest committees, and investigators.
Weinfurt KP; Friedman JY; Dinan MA; Allsbrook JS; Hall MA; Dhillon JK; Sugarman J
J Law Med Ethics; 2006; 34(3):581-91, 481. PubMed ID: 17144182
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. The protectors and the protected: what regulators and researchers can learn from IRB members and subjects.
Cook AF; Hoas H; Joyner JC
Narrat Inq Bioeth; 2013; 3(1):51-65. PubMed ID: 24407005
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Institutional review board approaches to the incidental findings problem.
Keane MA
J Law Med Ethics; 2008; 36(2):352-5, 213. PubMed ID: 18547204
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Health service research: the square peg in human subjects protection regulations.
Gittner LS; Roach MJ; Kikano G; Grey S; Dawson NV
J Med Ethics; 2011 Feb; 37(2):118-22. PubMed ID: 21071571
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. The Contribution of Ethics Review to Protection of Human Participants: Comment on "Measuring the Quality and Performance of Institutional Review Boards".
Grady C
J Empir Res Hum Res Ethics; 2019 Jul; 14(3):197-199. PubMed ID: 30896324
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. The Impact of Institutional Review Boards (IRBs) on Clinical Innovation: A Survey of Investigators and IRB Members.
Stryjewski TP; Kalish BT; Silverman B; Lehmann LS
J Empir Res Hum Res Ethics; 2015 Dec; 10(5):481-7. PubMed ID: 26564945
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Should society allow research ethics boards to be run as for-profit enterprises?
Emanuel EJ; Lemmens T; Elliot C
PLoS Med; 2006 Jul; 3(7):e309. PubMed ID: 16848618
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Ethics review for sale? Conflict of interest and commercial research review boards.
Lemmens T; Freedman B
Milbank Q; 2000; 78(4):547-84, iii-iv. PubMed ID: 11191449
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Disclosing conflicts of interest to research subjects: an ethical and legal analysis.
Resnik DB
Account Res; 2004; 11(2):141-59. PubMed ID: 15675055
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Ethical review in Pakistan: the credibility gap.
Jafarey AM; Iqbal SP; Hassan M
J Pak Med Assoc; 2012 Dec; 62(12):1354-7. PubMed ID: 23866494
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. US clinical-research system in need of review.
Ammann AJ
Nature; 2013 Jun; 498(7452):7. PubMed ID: 23739388
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
16. Institutional Review Board Quality, Private Equity, and Promoting Ethical Human Subjects Research.
Lynch HF; Rosenfeld S
Ann Intern Med; 2020 Oct; 173(7):558-562. PubMed ID: 32687743
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. The roles, challenges and institutionalization of institutional review boards.
Oyibo WA; Krugher M; Fagbenro-Beyioku AF
Nig Q J Hosp Med; 2008; 18(2):115-9. PubMed ID: 19068565
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Responses of medical schools to institutional conflicts of interest.
Ehringhaus SH; Weissman JS; Sears JL; Goold SD; Feibelmann S; Campbell EG
JAMA; 2008 Feb; 299(6):665-71. PubMed ID: 18270355
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Perspectives of Singaporean biomedical researchers and research support staff on actual and ideal IRB review functions and characteristics: A quantitative analysis.
Labude MK; Shen L; Zhu Y; Schaefer GO; Ong C; Xafis V
PLoS One; 2020; 15(12):e0241783. PubMed ID: 33382683
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Factors influencing the effectiveness of research ethics committees.
Schuppli CA; Fraser D
J Med Ethics; 2007 May; 33(5):294-301. PubMed ID: 17470508
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
