• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

确定一项临床活动何时应被归类为需要机构审查委员会审查的研究。

Determining when a clinical activity should be classified as research requiring Institutional Review Board Review.

作者信息

Prentice E D, Gordon B G, Lin M H

机构信息

University of Nebraska Medical Center, Omaha 68198-6810, USA.

出版信息

J Extra Corpor Technol. 1997 Jun;29(2):88-91.

PMID:10168536
Abstract

The boundary between therapy and research may at times be difficult to distinguish, and it is, therefore, important for health care professionals to recognize when a clinical activity should be properly classified as research. Research may be subject to federal regulations which require advance review and approval by an Institutional Review Board (IRB) in order to protect the rights and welfare of patients who serve as human subjects. This paper will discuss the criteria health care professionals can use to distinguish between therapy, innovative therapy, and therapeutic or clinical research.

摘要

治疗与研究之间的界限有时可能难以区分,因此,医疗保健专业人员认识到何时一项临床活动应被恰当地归类为研究非常重要。研究可能要遵循联邦法规,这些法规要求由机构审查委员会(IRB)进行预先审查和批准,以保护作为人类受试者的患者的权利和福利。本文将讨论医疗保健专业人员可用于区分治疗、创新治疗以及治疗性或临床研究的标准。

相似文献

1
Determining when a clinical activity should be classified as research requiring Institutional Review Board Review.确定一项临床活动何时应被归类为需要机构审查委员会审查的研究。
J Extra Corpor Technol. 1997 Jun;29(2):88-91.
2
Ethical and institutional review board issues.伦理与机构审查委员会问题
Adv Neurol. 1998;76:253-62.
3
American Society of Clinical Oncology policy statement: oversight of clinical research.美国临床肿瘤学会政策声明:临床研究监督
J Clin Oncol. 2003 Jun 15;21(12):2377-86. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2003.04.026. Epub 2003 Apr 29.
4
The pharmacist's role as a member of the institutional review board.药剂师作为机构审查委员会成员的角色。
Hosp Pharm. 1979 Sep;14(9):508-9, 512, 515 passim.
5
Protection of human subjects; standards for institutional review boards for clinical investigations--Food and Drug Administration. Final rule.保护人类受试者;临床研究机构审查委员会标准——食品药品监督管理局。最终规则。
Fed Regist. 1981 Jan 27;46(17 pt 2):8958-79.
6
Human subject protection in clinical trials.
J Int Assoc Physicians AIDS Care. 1997 Jan;3(1):19-23.
7
Clinical trials and physicians as double agents.临床试验与作为双重角色的医生。
Yale J Biol Med. 1992 Mar-Apr;65(2):65-74.
8
Practical tips for working effectively with your institutional review board.与机构审查委员会有效合作的实用技巧。
Respir Care. 2008 Oct;53(10):1354-61.
9
Determining risk in pediatric research with no prospect of direct benefit: time for a national consensus on the interpretation of federal regulations.在无直接受益前景的儿科研究中确定风险:就联邦法规的解释达成全国共识的时候了。
Am J Bioeth. 2007 Mar;7(3):5-10. doi: 10.1080/15265160601171572.
10
The institutional review board and beyond: future challenges to the ethics of human experimentation.机构审查委员会及其他:人体实验伦理面临的未来挑战。
Milbank Q. 1995;73(4):489-506.

引用本文的文献

1
Evaluation of clinical innovation: a gray zone in the ethics of modern clinical practice?临床创新的评估:现代临床实践伦理中的灰色地带?
J Gen Intern Med. 2008 Jan;23 Suppl 1(Suppl 1):27-31. doi: 10.1007/s11606-007-0410-2.