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 *

173 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 27653592)

  • 1. Participants' Role Expectations in Genetics Research and Re-consent: Revising the Theory and Methods of Mental Models Research Relating to Roles.
    Condit CM; Shen L; Edwards KL; Bowen DJ; Korngiebel DM; Johnson CO
    J Health Commun; 2016; 21(sup2):16-24. PubMed ID: 27653592
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Consent Issues in Genetic Research: Views of Research Participants.
    Goodman D; Johnson CO; Wenzel L; Bowen D; Condit C; Edwards KL
    Public Health Genomics; 2016; 19(4):220-8. PubMed ID: 27376949
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Researcher and study participants' perspectives of consent in clinical studies in four referral hospitals in Vietnam.
    Van Nuil JI; Nguyen TTT; Le Nguyen TN; Nguyen VVC; Chambers M; Ta TDN; Merson L; Nguyen TPD; Hoang MTV; Parker M; Bull S; Kestelyn E
    BMC Med Ethics; 2020 Jan; 21(1):4. PubMed ID: 31924199
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Cancer Clinical Trial Patient-Participants' Perceptions about Provider Communication and Dropout Intentions.
    Zhou Q; Ratcliffe SJ; Grady C; Wang T; Mao JJ; Ulrich CM
    AJOB Empir Bioeth; 2019; 10(3):190-200. PubMed ID: 31180295
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Impact of social stigma on the process of obtaining informed consent for genetic research on podoconiosis: a qualitative study.
    Tekola F; Bull S; Farsides B; Newport MJ; Adeyemo A; Rotimi CN; Davey G
    BMC Med Ethics; 2009 Aug; 10():13. PubMed ID: 19698115
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. A grounded theory study of the informed consent process for pharmacologic research.
    Nusbaum JG; Chenitz WC
    West J Nurs Res; 1990 Apr; 12(2):215-28. PubMed ID: 2321375
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Research participants' perceptions and views on consent for biobank research: a review of empirical data and ethical analysis.
    D'Abramo F; Schildmann J; Vollmann J
    BMC Med Ethics; 2015 Sep; 16():60. PubMed ID: 26354520
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Informed consent: views from Karachi.
    Jafarey A
    East Mediterr Health J; 2006; 12 Suppl 1():S50-5. PubMed ID: 17037689
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Informed Consent in Two Alzheimer's Disease Research Centers: Insights From Research Coordinators.
    Suver CM; Hamann JK; Chin EM; Goldstein FC; Blazel HM; Manzanares CM; Doerr MJ; Asthana SJ; Mangravite LM; Levey AI; Lah JJ; Edwards DF
    AJOB Empir Bioeth; 2020; 11(2):114-124. PubMed ID: 32175821
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Attitudes Regarding Enrollment in a Genetic Research Project: An Informed Consent Simulation Study Comparing Views of People With Depression, Diabetes, and Neither Condition.
    Kim JP; Ryan K; Roberts LW
    J Empir Res Hum Res Ethics; 2019 Oct; 14(4):328-337. PubMed ID: 31328612
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. A randomized controlled trial of short and standard-length consent forms for a genetic cohort study: is longer better?
    Matsui K; Lie RK; Turin TC; Kita Y
    J Epidemiol; 2012; 22(4):308-16. PubMed ID: 22447213
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Survey of Attitudes of Japanese Women Toward Genetic/Genomic Research.
    Moriya H; Inoue I; Ikeuchi M; Ishii N; Motojima M
    J Empir Res Hum Res Ethics; 2014 Jul; 9(3):29-38. PubMed ID: 26251854
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Researchers' views on informed consent for return of secondary results in genomic research.
    Appelbaum PS; Fyer A; Klitzman RL; Martinez J; Parens E; Zhang Y; Chung WK
    Genet Med; 2015 Aug; 17(8):644-50. PubMed ID: 25503499
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Participant views on consent in cancer genetics research: preparing for the precision medicine era.
    Edwards KL; Korngiebel DM; Pfeifer L; Goodman D; Renz A; Wenzel L; Bowen DJ; Condit CM
    J Community Genet; 2016 Apr; 7(2):133-43. PubMed ID: 26801345
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. What do researchers say? What do subjects hear? Not what they would like to hear. What do subjects need? More information.
    McMillan G
    Prot Hum Subj; 2005; (12):10-1. PubMed ID: 16317858
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. The good-subject effect: investigating participant demand characteristics.
    Nichols AL; Maner JK
    J Gen Psychol; 2008 Apr; 135(2):151-65. PubMed ID: 18507315
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Reconsidering the value of consent in biobank research.
    Allen J; McNamara B
    Bioethics; 2011 Mar; 25(3):155-66. PubMed ID: 19659851
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Health research participants' preferences for receiving research results.
    Long CR; Stewart MK; Cunningham TV; Warmack TS; McElfish PA
    Clin Trials; 2016 Dec; 13(6):582-591. PubMed ID: 27562368
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Next generation sequencing in psychiatric research: what study participants need to know about research findings.
    Mathieu G; Groisman IJ; Godard B
    Int J Neuropsychopharmacol; 2013 Oct; 16(9):2119-27. PubMed ID: 23725748
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Dynamic Consent: a potential solution to some of the challenges of modern biomedical research.
    Budin-Ljøsne I; Teare HJ; Kaye J; Beck S; Bentzen HB; Caenazzo L; Collett C; D'Abramo F; Felzmann H; Finlay T; Javaid MK; Jones E; Katić V; Simpson A; Mascalzoni D
    BMC Med Ethics; 2017 Jan; 18(1):4. PubMed ID: 28122615
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 9.