Research ethics boards: error and misconception.
作者信息
Bowen Angela
出版信息
PLoS Med. 2006 Oct;3(10):e458; author reply e460, e471. doi: 10.1371/journal.pmed.0030458.
Abstract
摘要
相似文献
1
Research ethics boards: error and misconception.研究伦理委员会：错误与误解。
PLoS Med. 2006 Oct;3(10):e458; author reply e460, e471. doi: 10.1371/journal.pmed.0030458.
2
What IRBs could learn from corporate boards.
IRB. 2005 Sep-Oct;27(5):1-6.
3
Regional ethics organizations for protection of human research participants.保护人类研究受试者的地区伦理组织。
Nat Med. 2004 Dec;10(12):1283-8. doi: 10.1038/nm1204-1283.
4
An introduction to institutional review boards.机构审查委员会简介。
Dimens Crit Care Nurs. 2008 Sep-Oct;27(5):223-5. doi: 10.1097/01.DCC.0000325081.78164.50.
5
Regional perspectives in research ethics: a report from Bangladesh.研究伦理的区域视角：来自孟加拉国的一份报告。
East Mediterr Health J. 2006;12 Suppl 1:S66-72.
6
Leveling the playing field? Exploring the merits of the ethics-as-process approach for judging qualitative research proposals.公平竞争？探索将伦理视为过程的方法在评判定性研究提案方面的优点。
Qual Health Res. 2002 Sep;12(7):1000-10. doi: 10.1177/104973202129120313.
7
It is time to professionalize institutional review boards.现在是时候让机构审查委员会专业化了。
Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med. 2009 Dec;163(12):1163-4. doi: 10.1001/archpediatrics.2009.225.
8
The institutional review board: purpose and process.
Clin Nurse Spec. 2012 Mar-Apr;26(2):66-70. doi: 10.1097/NUR.0b013e3182487d8e.
9
The flip of the coin: exempt, expedited, or full IRB review?抛硬币决定：豁免、加速还是由机构审查委员会进行全面审查？
AACN Adv Crit Care. 2007 Apr-Jun;18(2):213-7. doi: 10.1097/01.AACN.0000269265.29665.29.
10
Cooperative research ethics review boards: a win-win solution?合作研究伦理审查委员会：双赢解决方案？
IRB. 2005 May-Jun;27(3):1-7.
本文引用的文献
1
Should society allow research ethics boards to be run as for-profit enterprises?社会应该允许研究伦理委员会作为营利性企业来运作吗？
PLoS Med. 2006 Jul;3(7):e309. doi: 10.1371/journal.pmed.0030309. Epub 2006 Jul 25.
Zotero 插件