260 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 32943137)
21. Site Variability in Regulatory Oversight for an International Study of Pediatric Sepsis.
Michelson KN; Reubenson G; Weiss SL; Fitzgerald JC; Ackerman KK; Christie L; Bush JL; Nadkarni VM; Thomas NJ; Schreiner MS;
Pediatr Crit Care Med; 2018 Apr; 19(4):e180-e188. PubMed ID: 29377867
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
22. Clinical trials with cannabis medicines-guidance for ethics committees, governance officers and researchers to streamline ethics applications and ensuring patient safety: considerations from the Australian experience.
Martin JH; Hill C; Walsh A; Efron D; Taylor K; Kennedy M; Galettis R; Lightfoot P; Hanson J; Irving H; Agar M; Lacey J
Trials; 2020 Nov; 21(1):932. PubMed ID: 33203469
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
23. Out of the frying pan? Streamlining the ethics review process of multisite qualitative research projects.
Iedema RA; Allen S; Britton K; Hor S
Aust Health Rev; 2013 May; 37(2):137-9. PubMed ID: 23257167
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
24. Ethics review as a component of institutional approval for a multicentre continuous quality improvement project: the investigator's perspective.
Ezzat H; Ross S; von Dadelszen P; Morris T; Liston R; Magee LA;
BMC Health Serv Res; 2010 Jul; 10():223. PubMed ID: 20673343
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
25. Obstacles in establishing a national disease registry in Australia: lessons from the development of the CHAANZ Congenital Heart Disease Registry.
Lloyd LK; Nasir R; Nicholson C; Strange G; Celermajer DS
Aust Health Rev; 2023 Aug; 47(4):410-417. PubMed ID: 37188545
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
26. Assessment of the ethical review process for non-pharmacological multicentre studies in Germany on the basis of a randomised surgical trial.
Seiler CM; Kellmeyer P; Kienle P; Büchler MW; Knaebel HP;
J Med Ethics; 2007 Feb; 33(2):113-8. PubMed ID: 17264200
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
27. The high costs of getting ethical and site-specific approvals for multi-centre research.
Barnett AG; Campbell MJ; Shield C; Farrington A; Hall L; Page K; Gardner A; Mitchell BG; Graves N
Res Integr Peer Rev; 2016; 1():16. PubMed ID: 29451546
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
28. Ethical approval for national studies in Ireland: an illustration of current challenges.
Smith M; Doyle F; McGee HM; De La Harpe D
Ir J Med Sci; 2004; 173(2):72-4. PubMed ID: 15540705
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
29. Applying for ethical approval for research: the main issues.
Gelling L
Nurs Stand; 2016 Jan; 30(20):40-4. PubMed ID: 26758167
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
30. "No Country Bureaucratised its way to Excellence": A Content Analysis of Comments on a Petition to Streamline Australian Research Ethics and Governance Processes.
Scott AM; Bryant EA; Byrne JA; Taylor N; Barnett AG
J Empir Res Hum Res Ethics; 2022; 17(1-2):102-113. PubMed ID: 34636706
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
31. Ethics and privacy issues of a practice-based surveillance system: need for a national-level institutional research ethics board and consent standards.
Kotecha JA; Manca D; Lambert-Lanning A; Keshavjee K; Drummond N; Godwin M; Greiver M; Putnam W; Lussier MT; Birtwhistle R
Can Fam Physician; 2011 Oct; 57(10):1165-73. PubMed ID: 21998237
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
32. A SHARED study-the benefits and costs of setting up a health research study involving lay co-researchers and how we overcame the challenges.
Mockford C; Murray M; Seers K; Oyebode J; Grant R; Boex S; Staniszewska S; Diment Y; Leach J; Sharma U; Clarke R; Suleman R
Res Involv Engagem; 2016; 2():8. PubMed ID: 29062509
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
33. Primary Care Research Team Assessment (PCRTA): development and evaluation.
Carter YH; Shaw S; Macfarlane F
Occas Pap R Coll Gen Pract; 2002 Feb; (81):iii-vi, 1-72. PubMed ID: 12049028
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
34. The burdensome logistics of data linkage in Australia - the example of a national registry for congenital heart disease.
Lloyd LK; Nicholson C; Strange G; Celermajer DS
Aust Health Rev; 2024 Feb; 48(1):8-15. PubMed ID: 38118279
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
35. Ethical and research governance approval across Europe: Experiences from three European palliative care studies.
Preston N; van Delden JJ; Ingravallo F; Hughes S; Hasselaar J; van der Heide A; Van den Block L; Dunleavy L; Groot M; Csikos A; Payne S
Palliat Med; 2020 Jun; 34(6):817-821. PubMed ID: 32186242
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
36. Clinical governance and research ethics as barriers to UK low-risk population-based health research?
van Teijlingen ER; Douglas F; Torrance N
BMC Public Health; 2008 Nov; 8():396. PubMed ID: 19040750
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
37. Is bureaucracy being busted in research ethics and governance for health services research in the UK? Experiences and perspectives reported by stakeholders through an online survey.
Snooks H; Khanom A; Ballo R; Bower P; Checkland K; Ellins J; Ford GA; Locock L; Walshe K
BMC Public Health; 2023 Jun; 23(1):1119. PubMed ID: 37308950
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
38. Non-commercial clinical trials of a medicinal product: can they survive the current process of research approvals in the UK?
Sheard L; Tompkins CN; Wright NM; Adams CE
J Med Ethics; 2006 Jul; 32(7):430-4. PubMed ID: 16816046
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
39. Research approvals iceberg: helping it melt away.
Kolstoe SE; Carpenter D
BMC Med Ethics; 2019 Dec; 20(1):100. PubMed ID: 31870445
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
40. Variations in experience in obtaining local ethical approval for participation in a multi-centre study.
Maskell NA; Jones EL; Davies RJ;
QJM; 2003 Apr; 96(4):305-7. PubMed ID: 12651975
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Previous] [Next] [New Search]
