Letter Report: Protecting Participants in Behavioral and Social Science Research (2002)

Below is the uncorrected machine-read text of this chapter, intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text of each book. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.

10 References American Association of University Professors Protecting human beings: Institutional review boards and social science research. Academe87 (3):55–67. Association of American UniversitiesReport 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.ConnellyEvaluation of NIH Implementation of Section 491 of the Public Health Service Act, Mandating aProgram 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.GrayA 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.DiversInformed consent for clinical trials: A comparative study of standard versus simplified forms. Journal of the National Cancer Institute90(9):668–674. Goldstein, A.O., P.Frasier, P.Curtis, A.Reid, and N.E.KreherConsent form readability in university-sponsored research. Journal of Family Practice42(6):606–611. Gray, B.H., R.A.Cooke, and A.S.TannenbaumResearch involving human subjects. Science201(4361):1094–1101. Institute of MedicinePreserving 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 PasqualeTrials & tribulation. The Johns Hopkins Magazine54(1):28–41. National Commission for the Protection of Human Subjects of Biomedical and Behavioral ResearchThe Belmont Report: Ethical Principles and Guidelines for the Protection of Human Subjects ofResearch.Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office. Available: http://ohrp.osophs.dhhs.gov/humansubjects/guidance/45cfr46.htm. National Research CouncilPrivate 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.BaluyotA survey of IRB concerns about social and behavioral research. IRB: A Review of HumanSubjects Research14 (2):9–10. 

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.FraserInformed consent for clinical trials: Is simpler better?Journal of the National Cancer Institute90 (9):644–645. U.S. Department of Health and Human ServicesInstitutional 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 OfficeScientific Research: Continued Vigilance Critical to Protecting Human Subjects.GAO/HEHS-96–72. Washington, D.C.: GAO.