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.
115 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 35136570)
1. Attitudes of healthy volunteers to genetic testing in phase 1 clinical trials. Levesque S; Polasek TM; Haan E; Shakib S F1000Res; 2021; 10():259. PubMed ID: 35136570 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
2. Healthy volunteers' perceptions of risk in US Phase I clinical trials: A mixed-methods study. Fisher JA; McManus L; Cottingham MD; Kalbaugh JM; Wood MM; Monahan T; Walker RL PLoS Med; 2018 Nov; 15(11):e1002698. PubMed ID: 30457992 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Ethical Implications of User Perceptions of Wearable Devices. Segura Anaya LH; Alsadoon A; Costadopoulos N; Prasad PWC Sci Eng Ethics; 2018 Feb; 24(1):1-28. PubMed ID: 28155094 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Does informed consent given by healthy individuals when enrolling in clinical research feel less voluntary than for ill individuals? Roberts L; Kim JP J Psychiatr Res; 2018 Aug; 103():33-37. PubMed ID: 29772484 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Evaluating the consent preferences of UK research volunteers for genetic and clinical studies. Kelly SE; Spector TD; Cherkas LF; Prainsack B; Harris JM PLoS One; 2015; 10(3):e0118027. PubMed ID: 25761107 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Informed consent for exome sequencing research in families with genetic disease: the emerging issue of incidental findings. Bergner AL; Bollinger J; Raraigh KS; Tichnell C; Murray B; Blout CL; Telegrafi AB; James CA Am J Med Genet A; 2014 Nov; 164A(11):2745-52. PubMed ID: 25251809 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Perspectives of Australian adults about protecting the privacy of their health information in statistical databases. King T; Brankovic L; Gillard P Int J Med Inform; 2012 Apr; 81(4):279-89. PubMed ID: 22306206 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Comprehension and recall from the informed consent process by phase I healthy volunteers before dose administration. Tadros R; Caughey GE; Johns S; Shakib S Clin Trials; 2019 Jun; 16(3):283-289. PubMed ID: 30818994 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Picking and Choosing Among Phase I Trials : A Qualitative Examination of How Healthy Volunteers Understand Study Risks. Fisher JA; Monahan T; Walker RL J Bioeth Inq; 2019 Dec; 16(4):535-549. PubMed ID: 31713712 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Attitudes of nearly 7000 health professionals, genomic researchers and publics toward the return of incidental results from sequencing research. Middleton A; Morley KI; Bragin E; Firth HV; Hurles ME; Wright CF; Parker M; Eur J Hum Genet; 2016 Jan; 24(1):21-9. PubMed ID: 25920556 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Internet trials: participant experiences and perspectives. Mathieu E; Barratt A; Carter SM; Jamtvedt G BMC Med Res Methodol; 2012 Oct; 12():162. PubMed ID: 23092116 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. A survey of the opinions on 'informed consent' of women currently involved in clinical trials within a breast unit. Maslin A Eur J Cancer Care (Engl); 1994 Dec; 3(4):153-62. PubMed ID: 7704350 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. A Comparison of the Quality of Informed Consent for Clinical Trials of an Experimental Hookworm Vaccine Conducted in Developed and Developing Countries. Diemert DJ; Lobato L; Styczynski A; Zumer M; Soares A; Gazzinelli MF PLoS Negl Trop Dis; 2017 Jan; 11(1):e0005327. PubMed ID: 28114401 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Study of Awareness and Practice of Informed Consent Process Among Clinical Trial Participants and Their Motives Behind Participation. Ranjan R; Agarwal NB; Kapur P; Marwah A; Parveen R Asia Pac J Public Health; 2019 Nov; 31(8):710-718. PubMed ID: 31680532 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Knowledge and Attitudes of Research Participants in China Toward Electronic Informed Consent in Clinical Trials: A Cross Sectional Study. Hu Z; Ouyang C; Hahne J; Khoshnood K; Zhang J; Liu X; Wu Y; Wang X J Empir Res Hum Res Ethics; 2022 Jul; 17(3):362-372. PubMed ID: 35088620 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. 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]
17. Participants' understanding of a randomized controlled trial (RCT) through informed consent procedures in the RCT for breast cancer screening, J-START. Shiono YN; Zheng YF; Kikuya M; Kawai M; Ishida T; Kuriyama S; Ohuchi N Trials; 2014 Sep; 15():375. PubMed ID: 25257667 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Engaging research participants to inform the ethical conduct of mobile imaging, pervasive sensing, and location tracking research. Nebeker C; Lagare T; Takemoto M; Lewars B; Crist K; Bloss CS; Kerr J Transl Behav Med; 2016 Dec; 6(4):577-586. PubMed ID: 27688250 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. The views of patients and healthy volunteers on participation in clinical trials: an exploratory survey study. Chu SH; Jeong SH; Kim EJ; Park MS; Park K; Nam M; Shim JY; Yoon YR Contemp Clin Trials; 2012 Jul; 33(4):611-9. PubMed ID: 22405971 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related] [Next] [New Search]