The Informed Cohort Oversight Board: From Values to Architecture.
作者信息
Holm Ingrid A, Taylor Patrick L
机构信息
Dr. Holm is a principal investigator for The Gene Partnership (TGP), described herein. She is also affiliated with the following: Division of Genetics and Program in Genomics, Children's Hospital Boston; Department of Pediatrics, Harvard Medical School; The Manton Center for Orphan Disease Research, Children's Hospital Boston.
Mr. Taylor is a co-investigator of TGP and chair of the Informed Cohort Oversight Board (ICOB) from the ICOB's inception through the period described in this paper. He is also affiliated with the following: Petrie-Flom Center for Health Law Policy, Biotechnology and Bioethics, Harvard Law School; Department of Pediatrics, Harvard Medical School; Children's Hospital Informatics Program, Children's Hospital Boston.
出版信息
Minn J Law Sci Technol. 2012 Spring;13(2):669-690.
Abstract
摘要
相似文献
1
The Informed Cohort Oversight Board: From Values to Architecture.
Minn J Law Sci Technol. 2012 Spring;13(2):669-690.
2
Hospital board oversight of quality and patient safety: a narrative review and synthesis of recent empirical research.
Milbank Q. 2013 Dec;91(4):738-70. doi: 10.1111/1468-0009.12032.
3
American Society of Clinical Oncology policy statement: oversight of clinical research.
J Clin Oncol. 2003 Jun 15;21(12):2377-86. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2003.04.026. Epub 2003 Apr 29.
4
Harmonization and streamlining of research oversight for pragmatic clinical trials.
Clin Trials. 2015 Oct;12(5):449-56. doi: 10.1177/1740774515597685. Epub 2015 Sep 15.
5
Changing expectations for board oversight of healthcare quality: the emerging paradigm.
J Health Life Sci Law. 2009 Jul;2(4):31, 33-77.
6
Board oversight of community benefit: an ethical imperative.
Kennedy Inst Ethics J. 2011 Mar;21(1):25-50. doi: 10.1353/ken.2011.0001.
8
The views of quality improvement professionals and comparative effectiveness researchers on ethics, IRBs, and oversight.
J Empir Res Hum Res Ethics. 2015 Apr;10(2):132-44. doi: 10.1177/1556264615571558. Epub 2015 Feb 23.
9
Variability in the costs of institutional review board oversight.
Acad Med. 2006 Aug;81(8):708-12. doi: 10.1097/00001888-200608000-00006.
10
Board oversight of quality: any differences in process of care and mortality?
J Healthc Manag. 2009 Jan-Feb;54(1):15-29; discussion 29-30.
引用本文的文献
1
Maturing pharmacogenomic factors deliver improvements and cost efficiencies.
Camb Prism Precis Med. 2022 Oct 6;1:e3. doi: 10.1017/pcm.2022.3. eCollection 2023.
2
A FAUSTIAN BARGAIN THAT UNDERMINES RESEARCH PARTICIPANTS' PRIVACY RIGHTS AND RETURN OF RESULTS.
Fla Law Rev. 2019 Sep;71(5):1281-1345.
3
THE GENETIC INFORMATION NONDISCRIMINATION ACT AT AGE 10: GINA'S CONTROVERSIAL ASSERTION THAT DATA TRANSPARENCY PROTECTS PRIVACY AND CIVIL RIGHTS.
William Mary Law Rev. 2019;60(6):2017-2109.
4
Preferences for the Return of Individual Results From Research on Pediatric Biobank Samples.
J Empir Res Hum Res Ethics. 2017 Apr;12(2):97-106. doi: 10.1177/1556264617697839.
5
Participant Satisfaction With a Preference-Setting Tool for the Return of Individual Research Results in Pediatric Genomic Research.
J Empir Res Hum Res Ethics. 2015 Oct;10(4):414-26. doi: 10.1177/1556264615599620.
6
A semiquantitative metric for evaluating clinical actionability of incidental or secondary findings from genome-scale sequencing.
Genet Med. 2016 May;18(5):467-75. doi: 10.1038/gim.2015.104. Epub 2015 Aug 13.
7
The First Amendment Right to Speak About the Human Genome.
Univ Pa J Const Law. 2014 Feb 1;16(3):549-636.
8
A framework for analyzing the ethics of disclosing genetic research findings.
J Law Med Ethics. 2014 Summer;42(2):190-207. doi: 10.1111/jlme.12135.
9
Models of consent to return of incidental findings in genomic research.
Hastings Cent Rep. 2014 Jul-Aug;44(4):22-32. doi: 10.1002/hast.328. Epub 2014 Jun 11.
10
Pediatric data sharing in genomic research: attitudes and preferences of parents.
Pediatrics. 2014 Apr;133(4):690-7. doi: 10.1542/peds.2013-1592. Epub 2014 Mar 10.
本文引用的文献
1
The beliefs, motivations, and expectations of parents who have enrolled their children in a genetic biorepository.
Genet Med. 2012 Mar;14(3):330-7. doi: 10.1038/gim.2011.25. Epub 2012 Jan 26.
2
Biobanking in pediatrics: the human nonsubjects approach.
Per Med. 2011 Jan;8(1):79. doi: 10.2217/pme.10.70.
3
Ethical and practical guidelines for reporting genetic research results to study participants: updated guidelines from a National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute working group.
Circ Cardiovasc Genet. 2010 Dec;3(6):574-80. doi: 10.1161/CIRCGENETICS.110.958827.
4
Evaluation of the validity and utility of genetic testing for rare diseases.
Adv Exp Med Biol. 2010;686:115-31. doi: 10.1007/978-90-481-9485-8_8.
5
Multidimensional results reporting to participants in genomic studies: getting it right.
Sci Transl Med. 2010 Jun 23;2(37):37cm19. doi: 10.1126/scitranslmed.3000809.
6
Personal utility and genomic information: look before you leap.
Genet Med. 2009 Aug;11(8):575-6. doi: 10.1097/GIM.0b013e3181af0a80.
7
The Scientific Foundation for personal genomics: recommendations from a National Institutes of Health-Centers for Disease Control and Prevention multidisciplinary workshop.
Genet Med. 2009 Aug;11(8):559-67. doi: 10.1097/GIM.0b013e3181b13a6c.
8
Evaluating the utility of personal genomic information.
Genet Med. 2009 Aug;11(8):570-4. doi: 10.1097/GIM.0b013e3181a2743e.
9
Research ethics recommendations for whole-genome research: consensus statement.
PLoS Biol. 2008 Mar 25;6(3):e73. doi: 10.1371/journal.pbio.0060073.
10
Medicine. Reestablishing the researcher-patient compact.
Science. 2007 May 11;316(5826):836-7. doi: 10.1126/science.1135489.
Zotero 插件