Below are the first 10 and last 10 pages of uncorrected machine-read text (when available) of this chapter, followed by the top 30 algorithmically extracted key phrases from the chapter as a whole.
Intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text on the opening pages of each chapter. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.
Do not use for reproduction, copying, pasting, or reading; exclusively for search engines.
OCR for page 10
References American Association of University Professors Protecting human beings: Institutional review boards and social science research. Academe 87(3):55–67. Association of American Universities Report on University Protections of Human Beings Who Are the Subjects of Research. Report and recommendations from AAU’s Task Force on Research Accountability. Washington, D.C.: Association of American Universities (June 28). Bell, J., J.Whiton, and S.Connelly Evaluation of NIH Implementation of Section 491 of the Public Health Service Act, Mandating a Program of Protection for Research Subjects. Report prepared under a National Institute of Health contract, N01-OD-2–2109. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. Cooke, R.A., A.S.Tannenbaum, and B.H.Gray A survey of institutional review boards and research involving human subjects. Pp. 293–302 in Report and Recommendations on Institutional Review Boards, Appendix. National Commission for the Protection of Human Subjects of Biomedical and Behavioral Research. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office (September). Davis, T.C., R.F.Holcombe, H.J.Berkel, S.Pramanik, and S.G.Divers Informed consent for clinical trials: A comparative study of standard versus simplified forms. Journal of the National Cancer Institute 90(9):668–674. Goldstein, A.O., P.Frasier, P.Curtis, A.Reid, and N.E.Kreher Consent form readability in university-sponsored research. Journal of Family Practice 42(6):606–611. Gray, B.H., R.A.Cooke, and A.S.Tannenbaum Research involving human subjects. Science 201(4361):1094–1101. Institute of Medicine Preserving Public Trust: Accreditation and Human Research Participant Protection Programs. Committee on Assessing the System for Protecting Human Research Subjects, Board on Health Sciences Policy. Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press. Keiger, D., and S.De Pasquale Trials & tribulation. The Johns Hopkins Magazine 54(1):28–41. National Commission for the Protection of Human Subjects of Biomedical and Behavioral Research The Belmont Report: Ethical Principles and Guidelines for the Protection of Human Subjects of Research. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office. Available: http://ohrp.osophs.dhhs.gov/humansubjects/guidance/45cfr46.htm. National Research Council Private Lives and Public Policies: Confidentiality and Accessibility of Government Statistics. Panel on Confidentiality and Data Access. G.T.Duncan, T.B.Jabine, and V.A.de Wolf, eds. Committee on National Statistics and Social Science Research Council. Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press. Sieber, J.E., and R.M.Baluyot A survey of IRB concerns about social and behavioral research. IRB: A Review of Human Subjects Research 14(2):9–10.
OCR for page 11
Stout, D. U.S., citing safety, suspends human research aid at Duke. The New York Times, May 12. Taylor, K.M., A.Bejak, and R.H.S.Fraser Informed consent for clinical trials: Is simpler better? Journal of the National Cancer Institute 90(9):644–645. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Institutional Review Boards: A Time for Reform. Office of the Inspector General Publication No. OEI-01–97–00193. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. Available: http://www.dhhs.gov/progorg/oei/reports/a275.pdf. U.S. General Accounting Office Scientific Research: Continued Vigilance Critical to Protecting Human Subjects. GAO/HEHS-96–72. Washington, D.C.: GAO.
Representative terms from entire chapter: