Switch to: References

Add citations

You must login to add citations.
  1. Journalists, District Attorneys and Researchers: Why IRBs Should Get in the Middle.Anna H. Chodos & Sei J. Lee - 2015 - BMC Medical Ethics 16 (1):19.
    Federal regulations in the United States have shaped Institutional Review Boards to focus on protecting individual human subjects. Health services research studies focusing on healthcare institutions such as hospitals or clinics do not have individual human subjects. Since U.S. federal regulations are silent on what type of review, if any, these studies require, different IRBs may approach similar studies differently, resulting in undesirable variation in the review of studies focusing on healthcare institutions. Further, although these studies do not focus on (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • Research Exceptionalism.James Wilson & David Hunter - 2010 - American Journal of Bioethics 10 (8):45-54.
    Research involving human subjects is much more stringently regulated than many other nonresearch activities that appear to be at least as risky. A number of prominent figures now argue that research is overregulated. We argue that the reasons typically offered to justify the present system of research regulation fail to show that research should be subject to more stringent regulation than other equally risky activities. However, there are three often overlooked reasons for thinking that research should be treated as a (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   25 citations  
  • Manipulation of Information in Medical Research: Can It Be Morally Justified?Sapfo Lignou & Sarah Jl Edwards - 2012 - Research Ethics 8 (1):9-23.
    The aim of this article is to examine whether informational manipulation, used intentionally by the researcher to increase recruitment in the research study, can be morally acceptable. We argue that this question is better answered by following a non-normative account, according to which the ethical justifiability of informational manipulation should not be relevant to its definition. The most appropriate criterion by which informational manipulation should be considered as morally acceptable or not is the researcher’s special moral duties towards their subjects. (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   3 citations