TITLE

Groups finding common ground on Common Rule

PUB. DATE
December 2011
SOURCE
IRB Advisor;Dec2011, Vol. 11 Issue 12, p129
SOURCE TYPE
Periodical
DOC. TYPE
Article
ABSTRACT
No abstract available.
ACCESSION #
67616297

 

Related Articles

  • New Rules for Research with Human Participants? Berg, Jessica; Deming, Nicole // Hastings Center Report;Nov2011, Vol. 41 Issue 6, p10 

    The article discusses the advanced notice of proposed rulemaking (ANPRM) pertaining to the rules governing oversight of research on human subjects published by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services and the Office of Science and Technology. Among the rules covered are permission of...

  • Successfully Navigating the Human Subjects Approval Process. Cugini, MaryAnn // Journal of Dental Hygiene;2015 Supplement1, Vol. 89, p54 

    The article offers suggestions on how to guide the human subject approval process in behavioral or clinical research. An overview on the ethical principles in all research involving human subjects which involves on beneficence, justice and respect for persons, is provided. Also emphasized is the...

  • IRB takes on readability with staff education.  // IRB Advisor;Feb2012, Vol. 12 Issue 2, p19 

    The article discusses how improving the readability of informed consent is a process requiring ongoing commitment. Hallie Kassan, director of the IRB office at the Feinstein Institute for Medical Research in Manhasset, New York says that the need to revisit something on which one educates in...

  • Common Rule makeover denotes research reform.  // IRB Advisor;Sep2011, Vol. 11 Issue 9, p89 

    The article discusses the proposed revision of the Common Rule by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), which aims to streamline the clinical research process and alter the current human subjects protection regulations. The concerns addressed in an advance notice of proposed...

  • When Will We Learn? Meisel, Alan // IRB: Ethics & Human Research;Sep/Oct2010, Vol. 32 Issue 5, p9 

    A letter to the editor is presented in response to the article "The Evolution of Consent Forms for Research: A Quarter Century of Changes,” by Ilene Albala, Margaret Doyle, and Paul S. Appelbaum in the May-June 2010 issue.

  • CNE/CME QUESTIONS.  // IRB Advisor;Oct2011, Vol. 11 Issue 10, p108 

    A quiz related to the topics discussed within the journal, including proposed Common Rule changes for institutional review boards (IRBs) and biobanks, is presented.

  • Research governance and bureaucracy for multisite studies: implications for occupational therapy research. Whitehead, Phillip; Drummond, Avril; Fellows, Karen // British Journal of Occupational Therapy;Jul2011, Vol. 74 Issue 7, p355 

    Obtaining research governance approvals for research involving the National Health Service (NHS) has become increasingly complex. In order to obtain the necessary approvals to interview 20 occupational therapists from a range of locations across the United Kingdom, the authors had to submit...

  • CNE/CME QUESTIONS.  // IRB Advisor;Oct2013, Vol. 13 Issue 10, p119 

    The article discusses the objectives of Continuing Medical Education (CME) and Continuing Nursing Education (CNE) for institutional review board (IRB) staff. These include helping physicians and nurses establish clinical trial programs, apply mandated regulatory safeguards for patient...

  • Proposed Common Rule changes have pros and cons for institutions.  // IRB Advisor;Sep2011, Vol. 11 Issue 9, p85 

    The article discusses the pros and cons of the proposed Common Rule in the advance notice of proposed rulemaking (ANPRM) by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS). Paul W. Goebel, Chesapeake Institutional Review Board (IRB) member, voices his dissatisfaction with the proposed...

Share

Read the Article

Courtesy of THE LIBRARY OF VIRGINIA

Sorry, but this item is not currently available from your library.

Try another library?
Sign out of this library

Other Topics