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 *

117 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 6906010)

  • 1. The Institutional Review Board: a case study of no-risk decisions in health-related research.
    Gortner SR; Heath E; Sanders P
    Nurs Res; 1981; 30(1):21-4. PubMed ID: 6906010
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Success in spite of failure: why IRBs falter in reviewing risks and benefits.
    Williams PC
    IRB; 1984; 6(3):1-4. PubMed ID: 11649564
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Human experimentation: the review process in practice.
    Cowan DH
    Case West Reserve Law Rev; 1975; 25(3):533-64. PubMed ID: 11661165
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. The report of the Advisory Research Committee on the ethics review of research involving human subjects.
    Queens Gazette; 1974 : 1-5, 30 Jan; 6(4) Suppl):. PubMed ID: 11663457
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. A protocol review guide to reduce IRB inconsistency.
    Prentice ED; Antonson DL
    IRB; 1987; 9(1):9-11. PubMed ID: 11649892
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Research in the hospital setting on human subjects. Protecting the patient and the institution.
    Scheuer R
    Mt Sinai J Med; 1993 Oct; 60(5):391-8. PubMed ID: 8259119
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Ethical issues in the substantive and procedural aspects of research ethics review.
    Meslin EM
    Health Law Can; 1993; 13(3):179-91. PubMed ID: 10125789
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Hyperbaric research at Duke University--ethical considerations.
    Bennett PB; Kylstra JA
    Forsvarsmedicin; 1973; 9(3):373-8. PubMed ID: 11661280
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Guide to decision-making in institutional review of proposals for human experimentation.
    Himmelsbach CK
    Man Med; 1978; 3(3):201-220. PubMed ID: 12085911
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Ethical considerations in human experimentation.
    Bernstein JE
    J Clin Pharmacol New Drugs; 1975; 15(8-9):579-90. PubMed ID: 11661224
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Institutional review boards. A net too thin.
    Palca J
    Hastings Cent Rep; 1996; 26(3):4. PubMed ID: 8736666
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Continuing review of research involving human subjects: approach to the problem and remaining areas of concern.
    Gordon B; Prentice E
    IRB; 1997; 19(2):8-11. PubMed ID: 11655323
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Judging the ethical merit of clinical trials: what criteria do research ethics board members use?
    Meslin EM; Lavery JV; Sutherland HJ; Till JE
    IRB; 1994; 16(4):6-10. PubMed ID: 11654136
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Research on the profession of nursing. Ethical inquiry.
    Gortner SR
    Annu Rev Nurs Res; 1985; 3():193-214. PubMed ID: 3893476
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. On studying the powerful (or fearing to do so): a vital role for IRBs.
    Sieber JE
    IRB; 1989; 11(5):1-6. PubMed ID: 11650252
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. In loco parentis. Minimal risk as an ethical threshold for research upon children.
    Freedman B; Fuks A; Weijer C
    Hastings Cent Rep; 1993; 23(2):13-9. PubMed ID: 8463083
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Nurse involvement in Institutional Review Boards; the service setting perspective.
    Robb SS
    Nurs Res; 1981; 30(1):27-9. PubMed ID: 6906012
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Approving high risk, rejecting low risk: the case of two cases.
    Shannon TA; Ockene IS; Levine RJ
    IRB; 1985; 7(1):6-8. PubMed ID: 11649618
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. The IRB as deputy sheriff: proposed FDA regulation of the institutional review board.
    Huff TA
    Clin Res; 1979 Apr; 27(2):103-8. PubMed ID: 10241072
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. When does an experimental/innovative procedure become an accepted procedure?
    Norton ML
    Pharos Alpha Omega Alpha Honor Med Soc; 1975 Oct; 38(4):161-5. PubMed ID: 11661188
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 6.