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.
127 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 2716624)
1. The implications for Australia of the New Zealand report of the cervical cancer inquiry: no cause for complacency. McNeill PM Med J Aust; 1989 Mar; 150(5):264-8, 271. PubMed ID: 2716624 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Clinical research after Auckland. Gerber P; Coppleson M Med J Aust; 1989 Mar; 150(5):230-3. PubMed ID: 2716616 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
3. The New Zealand cervical cancer study: could it happen again? Paul C BMJ; 1988 Aug 20-27; 297(6647):533-9. PubMed ID: 3139190 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. The speculum bites back: feminists spark an inquiry into the treatment of carcinoma in situ at Auckland's National Women's Hospital. Rosier P Reprod Genet Eng; 1989; 2(2):121-32. PubMed ID: 11659299 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
5. "An unfortunate experiment": the New Zealand study of cancer of the cervix. Flagler EA; Winkler ER Ann R Coll Physicians Surg Can; 1992 Apr; 25(2):124-30. PubMed ID: 11651258 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
6. No new evidence on the cervical cancer study. Paul C; Holloway L N Z Med J; 1990 Dec; 103(903):581-3. PubMed ID: 2255455 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
7. NZ medicine after Cartwright. Gillett G BMJ; 1990 Apr; 300(6729):892-4. PubMed ID: 11642768 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
8. The 1960s cervical screening incident at National Women's Hospital, Auckland, New Zealand: insights for screening research, policy making, and practice. Raffle AE; Gray JAM J Clin Epidemiol; 2020 Jun; 122():A8-A13. PubMed ID: 32448444 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Why won't defenders of the Cartwright Inquiry provide evidence to justify their use of the term 'conventional treatment' for carcinoma in situ? Chalmers I N Z Med J; 2010 Jul; 123(1319):109-12. PubMed ID: 20717187 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
10. A report from New Zealand: an "unfortunate experiment. Campbell AV Bioethics; 1989 Jan; 3(1):59-66. PubMed ID: 11650114 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. The aftermath of the cervical cancer inquiry in New Zealand: an antipodal aberration or universal struggle? Munro K Issues Reprod Genet Eng; 1991; 4(1):31-9. PubMed ID: 11651368 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
12. New Zealand smear trial risked lives. Lowry S BMJ; 1988 Aug 20-27; 297(6647):507-8. PubMed ID: 11644476 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
13. Power and responsibility in the practice of medicine. Campbell AV; Tschudin V Stud Christ Ethics; 1989; 2(1):5-19. PubMed ID: 16127842 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Defendants of the Cartwright Inquiry are unable to provide a description of 'adequate care' for cervical carcinoma in situ. Chalmers I N Z Med J; 2010 Sep; 123(1322):85-7. PubMed ID: 20930897 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
15. Research into the Cartwright Inquiry. Bryder L N Z Med J; 2009 Jan; 122(1288):114-5. PubMed ID: 19182853 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
16. Carcinoma in situ of the cervix and its malignant potential. A lesson from New Zealand. Chang AR Cytopathology; 1990; 1(6):321-8. PubMed ID: 2101679 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Medical ethics in the dock. N Y Times Web; 1994 Mar; ():A16. PubMed ID: 11647023 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
18. The ethical review of medical research: a social movement to protect the interests of research subjects. Osborne LW Aust J Soc Issues; 1984 Aug; 19(3):155-60. PubMed ID: 11649620 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
19. Ethical issues in clinical research: the role of the research ethics committee. Aldridge HD; Walport MJ Br J Urol; 1995 Nov; 76 Suppl 2():23-8. PubMed ID: 8535750 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
20. The Cartwright report and consent. Harris EA N Z Med J; 1988 Oct; 101(856 Pt 1):671. PubMed ID: 3186014 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [Next] [New Search]