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 *

227 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 27307420)

  • 1. Is Safety in the Eye of the Beholder? Safeguards in Research With Adults With Intellectual Disability.
    McDonald KE; Conroy NE; Kim CI; LoBraico EJ; Prather EM; Olick RS
    J Empir Res Hum Res Ethics; 2016 Dec; 11(5):424-438. PubMed ID: 27307420
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. A quantitative study of attitudes toward the research participation of adults with intellectual disability: Do stakeholders agree?
    McDonald KE; Conroy NE; Olick RS;
    Disabil Health J; 2018 Jul; 11(3):345-350. PubMed ID: 29292211
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. "You can't be cold and scientific": community views on ethical issues in intellectual disability research.
    McDonald KE; Schwartz NM; Gibbons CM; Olick RS
    J Empir Res Hum Res Ethics; 2015 Apr; 10(2):196-208. PubMed ID: 25769310
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Is It Worth It? Benefits in Research With Adults With Intellectual Disability.
    McDonald KE; Conroy NE; Olick RS;
    Intellect Dev Disabil; 2016 Dec; 54(6):440-453. PubMed ID: 27893316
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Gatekeepers of science: attitudes toward the research participation of adults with intellectual disability.
    McDonald KE; Keys CB; Henry DB
    Am J Ment Retard; 2008 Nov; 113(6):466-78. PubMed ID: 19127657
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. How the powerful decide: access to research participation by those at the margins.
    McDonald KE; Keys CB
    Am J Community Psychol; 2008 Sep; 42(1-2):79-93. PubMed ID: 18584318
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. What's the Harm? Harms in Research With Adults With Intellectual Disability.
    McDonald KE; Conroy NE; Olick RS; Panel TP
    Am J Intellect Dev Disabil; 2017 Jan; 122(1):78-92. PubMed ID: 28095059
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Using a Delphi survey to gain an international consensus on the challenges of conducting trials with adults with intellectual disabilities.
    Mulhall P; Taggart L; Coates V; McAloon T
    Clin Trials; 2020 Apr; 17(2):138-146. PubMed ID: 31856601
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Influence of ethical safeguards on research participation: comparison of perspectives of people with schizophrenia and psychiatrists.
    Roberts LW; Hammond KA; Warner TD; Lewis R
    Am J Psychiatry; 2004 Dec; 161(12):2309-11. PubMed ID: 15569905
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Ethical issues in phase I oncology research: a comparison of investigators and institutional review board chairpersons.
    Kodish E; Stocking C; Ratain MJ; Kohrman A; Siegler M
    J Clin Oncol; 1992 Nov; 10(11):1810-6. PubMed ID: 1403062
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. A survey study of the attitudes and experiences of adults with intellectual disability regarding participation in research.
    Conroy NE; McDonald KE; Olick RS;
    J Intellect Disabil Res; 2021 Oct; 65(10):941-948. PubMed ID: 34369629
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. The views of members of Local Research Ethics Committees, researchers and members of the public towards the roles and functions of LRECs.
    Kent G
    J Med Ethics; 1997 Jun; 23(3):186-90. PubMed ID: 9220334
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Exception From Informed Consent: How IRB Reviewers Assess Community Consultation and Public Disclosure.
    Chisolm-Straker M; Nassisi D; Daya MR; Cook JNB; Wilets IF; Clesca C; Richardson LD
    AJOB Empir Bioeth; 2021; 12(1):24-32. PubMed ID: 32990501
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Moving Forward on Consent Practices in Australia.
    McWhirter RE; Eckstein L
    J Bioeth Inq; 2018 Jun; 15(2):243-257. PubMed ID: 29532387
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Informed consent in a vulnerable population group: supporting individuals aging with intellectual disability to participate in developing their own health and support programs.
    Wark S; MacPhail C; McKay K; Müeller A
    Aust Health Rev; 2017 Aug; 41(4):436-442. PubMed ID: 27537279
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Attitudes of Pakistani community members and staff toward people with intellectual disability.
    Patka M; Keys CB; Henry DB; McDonald KE
    Am J Intellect Dev Disabil; 2013 Jan; 118(1):32-43. PubMed ID: 23301901
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Education versus screening: the use of capacity to consent tools in psychiatric genomics.
    Kong C; Efrem M; Campbell M
    J Med Ethics; 2020 Feb; 46(2):137-143. PubMed ID: 31563871
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Ethical research with the developmentally disabled.
    Weisstub DN; Arboleda-Flórez J
    Can J Psychiatry; 1997 Jun; 42(5):492-6. PubMed ID: 9220112
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Safeguarding research subjects who lack decision-making capacity.
    Griffith R; Tengnah C
    Br J Community Nurs; 2010 Oct; 15(10):508-9, 511-2. PubMed ID: 20966849
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. IRB intervention in the consent process.
    Robertson JA
    IRB; 1982 May; 4(5):1-5. PubMed ID: 11649407
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 12.