Switch to: References

Add citations

You must login to add citations.
  1. Appropriateness of no-fault compensation for research-related injuries from an African perspective: an appeal for action by African countries: Table 1.Patrick Dongosolo Kamalo, Lucinda Manda-Taylor & Stuart Rennie - 2016 - Journal of Medical Ethics 42 (8):528-533.
    Compensation for research-related injuries (RRIs) remains a challenge in the current environment of global collaborative biomedical research as exemplified by the continued reluctance of the US government, a major player in international biomedical research, to enact regulation for mandatory compensation for RRIs. This stance is in stark contrast to the mandatory compensation policies adopted by other democracies like the European Union (EU) countries. These positions taken by the USA and the EU create a nexus of confusion when research is exported (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  • In need of remedy: US policy for compensating injured research participants.Elizabeth R. Pike - 2014 - Journal of Medical Ethics 40 (3):182-185.
    There is an emerging ethical consensus that injured research participants should receive medical care and compensation for their research-related injuries. This consensus is premised on notions of beneficence, distributive justice, compensatory justice and reciprocity. In response, countries around the world have implemented no-fault compensation systems to ensure that research participants are adequately protected in the event of injury. The United States, the world's leading sponsor of research, has chosen instead to rely on its legal system to provide injured research participants (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   6 citations