围绕私人资助研究的法律问题在多伦多引发了轩然大波。
Legal issues surrounding privately funded research cause furore in Toronto.
作者信息
Shuchman M
机构信息
Department of Psychiatry, State University of New York, Buffalo, USA.
出版信息
CMAJ. 1998 Oct 20;159(8):983-6.
Abstract
Toronto physician Miriam Shuchman has spent the last 4 months tracking the research issues surrounding a controversial clinical trial conducted in Toronto. Much of the information appearing in this article was gathered while she was preparing a segment for the CBC Radio program Quirks and Quarks. Earlier, she had reported on similar issues in the US for the Annals of Internal Medicine.
摘要
多伦多医生米里亚姆·舒克曼在过去4个月里一直在追踪围绕多伦多一项有争议的临床试验的研究问题。本文中出现的大部分信息是她在为加拿大广播公司电台节目《奇思妙想》准备一个板块时收集的。早些时候，她曾为《内科学年鉴》报道过美国的类似问题。
相似文献
1
Legal issues surrounding privately funded research cause furore in Toronto.围绕私人资助研究的法律问题在多伦多引发了轩然大波。
CMAJ. 1998 Oct 20;159(8):983-6.
2
Constraints of interest: lessons at the Hospital for Sick Children.关注的限制因素：病童医院的经验教训
CMAJ. 1998 Oct 20;159(8):955-7.
3
Independent review adds to controversy at Sick Kids.独立审查加剧了病童医院的争议。
CMAJ. 1999 Feb 9;160(3):386-8.
4
Industry and the academy: conflicts of interest in contemporary health research.产业界与学术界：当代健康研究中的利益冲突
Health Law J. 2002;10:103-22.
5
Academic freedom in clinical research.临床研究中的学术自由。
N Engl J Med. 2002 Oct 24;347(17):1368-71. doi: 10.1056/NEJMsb020394.
6
Controversial HSC clinical trials report made public. Hospital for Sick Children.有争议的造血干细胞临床试验报告公开。病童医院。
Nat Med. 1999 Jan;5(1):7. doi: 10.1038/4676.
7
The deferiprone controversy: time to move on.去铁酮争议：是时候向前看了。
CMAJ. 2002 Feb 19;166(4):452-3.
8
9
Deferiprone-induced seizures in a patient with β-thalassemia major.去铁酮诱发重型β地中海贫血患者癫痫发作。
Blood Cells Mol Dis. 2013 Aug;51(2):94-5. doi: 10.1016/j.bcmd.2013.03.002. Epub 2013 Apr 12.
10
Canadian whistleblower row prompts broader code of conduct.加拿大举报人事件引发更广泛的行为准则。
Nature. 1998;396(6713):715. doi: 10.1038/25431.
引用本文的文献
1
Setting the IMPACT (IMProve Access to Clinical Trial data) Observatory baseline.设定 IMPACT（改善临床试验数据获取）观测站基线。
Biochem Med (Zagreb). 2018 Feb 15;28(1):010201. doi: 10.11613/BM.2018.010201.
2
Public welfare agenda or corporate research agenda?公益议程还是企业研究议程？
Mens Sana Monogr. 2005 Mar;3(1):41-80. doi: 10.4103/0973-1229.27878.
3
Finer nuances of clinical study agreements for research trials.研究试验临床研究协议的细微差别。
Indian J Ophthalmol. 2008 Jul-Aug;56(4):267-8. doi: 10.4103/0301-4738.41409.
4
Evidence-based ethics for neurology and psychiatry research.神经病学与精神病学研究的循证伦理学
NeuroRx. 2004 Jul;1(3):372-7. doi: 10.1602/neurorx.1.3.372.
Zotero 插件