Literature DB >> 22461594

Research ethics. To protect human subjects, review what was done, not proposed.

Robert Klitzman1, Paul S Appelbaum.   

Abstract

Entities:  

Mesh：

Year:  2012        PMID： 22461594      PMCID： PMC3549460          DOI： 10.1126/science.1217225

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Science        ISSN： 0036-8075            Impact factor:   47.728


× No keyword cloud information.
  14 in total

1.  Variation in institutional review board responses to a standard protocol for a multicenter clinical trial.

Authors:  T O Stair; C R Reed; M S Radeos; G Koski; C A Camargo
Journal:  Acad Emerg Med       Date:  2001-06       Impact factor: 3.451

2.  Therapeutic misconception in clinical research: frequency and risk factors.

Authors:  Paul S Appelbaum; Charles W Lidz; Thomas Grisso
Journal:  IRB       Date:  2004 Mar-Apr

3.  Evaluating the risks of clinical research.

Authors:  Annette Rid; Ezekiel J Emanuel; David Wendler
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2010-10-06       Impact factor: 56.272

4.  Variation in Institutional Review processes for a multisite observational study.

Authors:  Catherine C Vick; Kelly R Finan; Catarina Kiefe; Leigh Neumayer; Mary T Hawn
Journal:  Am J Surg       Date:  2005-11       Impact factor: 2.565

Review 5.  A review finds that multicenter studies face substantial challenges but strategies exist to achieve Institutional Review Board approval.

Authors:  Sarah M Greene; Ann M Geiger
Journal:  J Clin Epidemiol       Date:  2006-03-15       Impact factor: 6.437

6.  Medical education research and IRB review: an analysis and comparison of the IRB review process at six institutions.

Authors:  Liselotte N Dyrbye; Matthew R Thomas; Alex J Mechaber; Anne Eacker; William Harper; F Stanford Massie; David V Power; Tait D Shanafelt
Journal:  Acad Med       Date:  2007-07       Impact factor: 6.893

7.  The reporting of monetary compensation in research articles.

Authors:  Robert Klitzman; Ilene Albala; Joseph Siragusa; Kristen N Nelson; Paul S Appelbaum
Journal:  J Empir Res Hum Res Ethics       Date:  2007-12       Impact factor: 1.742

8.  Quality of informed consent in cancer clinical trials: a cross-sectional survey.

Authors:  S Joffe; E F Cook; P D Cleary; J W Clark; J C Weeks
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  2001-11-24       Impact factor: 79.321

9.  How do institutional review boards apply the federal risk and benefit standards for pediatric research?

Authors:  Seema Shah; Amy Whittle; Benjamin Wilfond; Gary Gensler; David Wendler
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2004-01-28       Impact factor: 56.272

10.  How local IRBs view central IRBs in the US.

Authors:  Robert Klitzman
Journal:  BMC Med Ethics       Date:  2011-06-23       Impact factor: 2.652
View more
  4 in total

Review 1.  Institutional Review Boards: Purpose and Challenges.

Authors:  Christine Grady
Journal:  Chest       Date:  2015-11       Impact factor: 9.410

2.  Research participant-centered outcomes at NIH-supported clinical research centers.

Authors:  Rhonda G Kost; Laura N Lee; Jennifer L Yessis; Robert Wesley; Sandra Alfano; Steven R Alexander; Sylvia Baedorf Kassis; Philip Cola; Ann Dozier; Dan E Ford; Paul A Harris; Emmelyn Kim; Simon Craddock Lee; Gerri O'Riordan; Mary-Tara Roth; Kathryn Schuff; June Wasser; David K Henderson; Barry S Coller
Journal:  Clin Transl Sci       Date:  2014-05-19       Impact factor: 4.689

3.  Assessing participant-centered outcomes to improve clinical research.

Authors:  Rhonda G Kost; Laura M Lee; Jennifer Yessis; Robert A Wesley; David K Henderson; Barry S Coller
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2013-12-05       Impact factor: 91.245

4.  Emerging issues in paediatric health research consent forms in Canada: working towards best practices.

Authors:  Edward S Dove; Denise Avard; Lee Black; Bartha M Knoppers
Journal:  BMC Med Ethics       Date:  2013-01-30       Impact factor: 2.652
  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.