Literature DB >> 16280994

Researchers break the rules in frustration at review boards.

Jim Giles.   

Abstract

Keywords:  Biomedical and Behavioral Research

Mesh：

Year:  2005        PMID： 16280994     DOI： 10.1038/438136b

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Nature        ISSN： 0028-0836            Impact factor:   49.962


× No keyword cloud information.
  5 in total

1.  Attitudes toward genetic research review: results from a national survey of professionals involved in human subjects protection.

Authors:  Amy A Lemke; Susan B Trinidad; Karen L Edwards; Helene Starks; Georgia L Wiesner
Journal:  J Empir Res Hum Res Ethics       Date:  2010-03       Impact factor: 1.742

2.  A Case-Study of the Resources and Functioning of Two Research Ethics Committees in Western India.

Authors:  Tiffany Chenneville; Lynette Menezes; Jayendrakumar Kosambiya; Rajendra Baxi
Journal:  J Empir Res Hum Res Ethics       Date:  2016-07-31       Impact factor: 1.742

3.  The scientific response to a pandemic.

Authors:  Gigi Kwik Gronvall; Richard E Waldhorn; D A Henderson
Journal:  PLoS Pathog       Date:  2006-02       Impact factor: 6.823

4.  Is your ethics committee efficient? Using "IRB Metrics" as a self-assessment tool for continuous improvement at the Faculty of Tropical Medicine, Mahidol University, Thailand.

Authors:  Pornpimon Adams; Jaranit Kaewkungwal; Chanthima Limphattharacharoen; Sukanya Prakobtham; Krisana Pengsaa; Srisin Khusmith
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2014-11-18       Impact factor: 3.240

5.  Perspectives of Singaporean biomedical researchers and research support staff on actual and ideal IRB review functions and characteristics: A quantitative analysis.

Authors:  Markus K Labude; Liang Shen; Yujia Zhu; G Owen Schaefer; Catherine Ong; Vicki Xafis
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2020-12-31       Impact factor: 3.240
  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.