ライフサイエンスコーパス: research ethics

1 ocol judgments on complex issues of clinical research ethics.

2 s of QI methods, with concurrent advances in research ethics.

3 e author to any information related to human research ethics.

4 Informed consent is a fundamental element of research ethics.

5 fundamental changes in the infrastructure of research ethics.

6 proved by the institutional review board for research ethics.

7 t juncture in the genesis of modern clinical research ethics.

8 y aligned with an industry-based approach to research ethics.

9 autonomy in the context of the evolution of research ethics.

10 vior), intensive care unit leadership style, research ethics, allocation of resources, triage, and ot

11 es to address underreporting, and 4) advance research ethics and equity.

12 t, informatics, statistical methodology, and research ethics and policy, and these are collectively h

13 In this article, we review sovereignty, research ethics, and data-sharing considerations when do

14 on the traditional principles of medical and research ethics, and highlighting the need to ensure hea

15 demies report articulates a path forward for research, ethics, and governance of clinical application

16 Institutional review board research ethics approval was granted to use anonymized c

17 The study had local research ethics approval.

18 A regional committee for medical research ethics approved the study, and informed volunte

19 ent, and the Norwegian committee for medical research ethics approved the study.

20 Three generations in the evolution of human research ethics are identified: 1) Hippocrates to Nuremb

21 s on observational research, and psychiatric research ethics as applied to special populations such a

22 The Office of Human Research Ethics at the University of North Carolina and

23 sual clinical care, is an important topic in research ethics because it may impede informed consent.

24 proval was obtained from Hamilton Integrated Research Ethics Board (REB #13216-C) and CNN (REB #04-06

25 his study protocol was approved by the local research ethics board and by Health Canada.

26 dy was approved by the University of Toronto Research Ethics Board and did not require informed conse

27 t to a protocol that was approved by a local research ethics board and Health Canada and was complian

28 Study was local research ethics board and Health Canada approved and HIP

29 tive observational study was approved by the research ethics board and included 55 consecutive patien

30 Research ethics board approval was not necessary because

31 Research ethics board approval was not necessary because

32 Materials and Methods Research ethics board approval was obtained and all pati

33 Institutional research ethics board approval was obtained for this ret

34 With Research Ethics Board approval, clinical data obtained f

35 Following Research Ethics Board approval, data were extracted on l

36 Materials and Methods The clinical research ethics board approved chart review, and the req

37 The institutional research ethics board approved this study and waived inf

38 Informed consent was waived after the research ethics board approved this study.

39 udy was performed with the approval from the Research Ethics Board at the University of Toronto and w

40 Approval was obtained from the institutional research ethics board, and informed consent from patient

41 ational study was obtained from the hospital research ethics board, and the need to obtain informed c

42 niversity of Western Ontario Health Sciences Research Ethics Board, London, Ontario, Canada), and wri

43 Materials and Methods In this institutional research ethics board-approved prospective study, health

44 Materials and Methods In this research ethics board-approved prospective study, partic

45 In this institutional research ethics board-approved prospective study, with p

46 oved by Western University's Health Sciences Research Ethics Board.

47 clinical trial approved by the institutional research ethics board.

48 The study was approved by the local research ethics board.

49 The study was approved by the research ethics board.

50 dy was approved by the University of Toronto Research Ethics Board; informed consent was not required

51 ry distress syndrome, and with approval from research ethics boards, we collected a minimal dataset o

52 researchers in donation and transplantation; research ethics boards; and healthcare providers and adm

53 nal political and human rights contexts into research ethics codes or ethics reviews.

54 ics approval was granted by South Manchester Research Ethics Committe.

55 ned from the University of Zambia Biomedical Research Ethics Committee (011-04-12).

56 was obtained by the University of Sheffield Research Ethics Committee (026380).

57 Mbarara University of Science and Technology Research Ethics Committee (14/03-19), and Uganda Nationa

58 e study was approved by the West of Scotland Research Ethics Committee (16/WS/0068).

59 y protocol was approved by the London-Surrey Research Ethics Committee (20/HRA/2282).

60 The Institutional Research Ethics Committee (IRREC) of University of Dodom

61 y was approved by the UK Ministry of Defence research ethics committee (MODREC 165/Gen/10 and 692/MoD

62 was granted by the University College London research ethics committee (Project ID: 14895/005) and al

63 England (Ref: 13/SC/0149) and the Scotland A Research Ethics Committee (Ref 20/SS/0028), and is regis

64 The study was approved by the research ethics committee and informed consent was obtai

65 This study was approved by the Cantonal Research Ethics Committee and informed written consent w

66 hods This study was approved by the national research ethics committee and was performed with informe

67 oval from the Newcastle and North Tyneside 2 Research Ethics Committee and with written consent.

68 cs approval was granted by Ulster University Research Ethics Committee and written informed consent (

69 MATERIALS AND Approval from the local research ethics committee and written informed consent w

70 Local research ethics committee approval and informed consent

71 Research ethics committee approval and informed consent

72 Research ethics committee approval and patient written i

73 study, performed between 2006 and 2016 with research ethics committee approval and written informed

74 Research ethics committee approval and written informed

75 The study was performed with local research ethics committee approval and written informed

76 The protocol had the appropriate national research ethics committee approval for the countries whe

77 Research ethics committee approval was granted to record

78 Research ethics committee approval was obtained for this

79 Local research ethics committee approval was obtained with wri

80 Local research ethics committee approval was obtained; informe

81 D Informed consent and multicenter and local research ethics committee approval were obtained.

82 )He and (129)Xe were performed with National Research Ethics Committee approval, with informed consen

83 itution study was HIPAA-compliant with local research ethics committee approval.

84 only 9% accessed the detail presented on the Research Ethics Committee approved participant informati

85 The institutional research ethics committee approved the study, and parent

86 The local research ethics committee approved the study, and writte

87 ients provided signed consent, and the local research ethics committee approved the study.

88 The local research ethics committee approved this study, and the s

89 The local research ethics committee approved this study, and writt

90 proval was granted by the Faculty of Science Research Ethics Committee at the University of Bristol.

91 iew board exemption was granted by the local research ethics committee for this retrospective study.

92 K National Health Service Central Office for Research Ethics Committee guidelines; informed patient c

93 y was approved by the South Central-Oxford C Research Ethics Committee in England (Ref: 13/SC/0149) a

94 esearchers, community organizers, advocates, research ethics committee members, parents of AYAs, and

95 Ethics approval was granted by the Research Ethics Committee of the National Institute for

96 2004-000991-15; Multicentre Research Ethics Committee Ref No.

97 within 7 domains: justifying the CRT design, research ethics committee review, identifying research p

98 The research ethics committee waived the requirement for inf

99 As a result, a research ethics committee was established at three hospi

100 After approval from the Human Research Ethics Committee was obtained, we recruited pot

101 at a time, if clinically appropriate, (5) a Research Ethics Committee with specific transplantation

102 Methods The study was approved by the local research ethics committee, and all participants gave wri

103 The study was approved by the Social Care Research Ethics Committee, and all participants provided

104 The study was approved by the Royal Free Research Ethics Committee, and all subjects gave full wr

105 This study was approved by the hospital research ethics committee, and informed written consent

106 ials and Methods The study was approved by a research ethics committee, and participants gave written

107 The study was approved by the national research ethics committee, and written patient consent w

108 as approved by the Griffith University Human Research Ethics Committee, the Stanford University Panel

109 The study was approved by the University's research ethics committee, which conforms to the declara

110 al was obtained by the Southern Health Human Research Ethics Committee, which waived the requirement

111 Social Sciences, Education and Social Work's Research Ethics Committee, with pupil opt-in and parenta

112 care, and should be overseen by a functional research ethics committee.

113 ospective analysis was approved by the local research ethics committee.

114 l was granted by the University of Sheffield Research Ethics Committee.

115 earch Authority approval from London - Brent Research Ethics Committee.

116 This study was approved by the local research ethics committee.

117 sent and the study was approved by the local research ethics committee.

118 with due ethical approval of the Nottingham Research Ethics Committee.

119 case-control study was approved by the local research ethics committee.

120 view Board, and the Australian Defense Human Research Ethics Committee.

121 The study protocol was approved by the local research ethics committee.

122 lfilled before it would be appropriate for a research ethics committee/institutional review board to

123 al ethical approval was granted by the local research ethics committee; all participants gave written

124 proval, and monitoring of clinical trials by research ethics committees (RECs).

125 parental consent and raising awareness among research ethics committees about AYA-independent consent

126 based on archived protocols approved by six research ethics committees between 13 January 2000 and 2

127 ms and guidelines for further development of research ethics committees in El Salvador.

128 andomized clinical trials (RCTs) approved by research ethics committees in Switzerland, the UK, Canad

129 cluded 326 RCT protocols approved in 2012 by research ethics committees in Switzerland, the United Ki

130 ess to 347 RCT protocols approved in 2016 by research ethics committees in the UK, Switzerland, Germa

131 The study was approved by the human research ethics committees of the participating hospital

132 l participants, patients, sponsors, funders, research ethics committees or institutional review board

133 amples, obtained under protocols approved by research ethics committees, and found no expression of X

134 guidance document to provide research teams, research ethics committees, and other stakeholders with

135 stakeholders, such as researchers, funders, research ethics committees, and regulators play crucial

136 tors, trial participants, patients, funders, research ethics committees, journals, trial registries,

137 tors, trial participants, patients, funders, research ethics committees, journals, trial registries,

138 tors, trial participants, patients, funders, research ethics committees, journals, trial registries,

139 rsement by funders, regulators, legislators, research ethics committees, patient organisations, and j

140 Finally, journals, funders, sponsors, research ethics committees, regulators, and legislators

141 that research projects have been examined by research ethics committees.

142 national bodies tasked with the oversight of research ethics committees.

143 The intervention is a project-based research ethics curriculum that was designed to enhance

144 oved by the Regional Committee on Biomedical Research Ethics, Denmark.

145 Classic statements of research ethics generally advise against dual-role conse

146 The Human Research Ethics Group, administered by the Center for Bi

147 olders may be included in the development of research ethics guidance.

148 the human rights movement and the sphere of research ethics have overlapping principles and goals, t

149 eld experiments demands a rethink of current research ethics in computational social science and psyc

150 developed framework of principles for animal research ethics in exploring ethical questions raised by

151 In short, research ethics is the set of specific principles, rules

152 ponses were categorized into 6 broad topics: research ethics issues; managing expectations and inform

153 Unique challenges include (1) research ethics (living versus deceased status of the do

154 nd-blood characters convey the principles of research ethics more vividly than a dry account in a tex

155 33963 and Research Ethics no.

156 e 2 most prominent medical whistleblowers in research ethics of the 20th century.

157 gan transplantation outcomes but face unique research ethics, outcome data, and regulatory challenges

158 t Virginia Commonwealth University involving research ethics raises important and complex issues in s

159 The study was approved by Showa University Research Ethics Review Board (Approval number: 21-113-B)

160 investigators and that between patients and research ethics review boards are both damaged.

161 Every element of a research ethics review--the balance of risks and benefit

162 ponsors, journal editors and peer reviewers, research ethics reviewers, and funders) use this extensi

163 (including trial investigators and sponsors, research ethics reviewers, funders, journal editors, and

164 ts on vulnerable individuals influenced many research ethics reviews to focus exclusively on risks to

165 AND This study was approved by the National Research Ethics Service Committee North West-Lancaster (

166 thods The study was approved by the National Research Ethics Service Committee; written informed cons

167 Given the advances in research ethics, substantially grounded in the Nuremberg

168 To strengthen research ethics systemically, the Pan American Health Or

169 and indicators to address core components of research ethics systems.

170 Despite several codes of research ethics, the issuance of comprehensive rules reg

171 We report a randomized trial of a research ethics training intervention designed to enhanc

172 tional ethical committee for animal care and research ethics was obtained.

173 dicators, and, more generally, to strengthen research ethics with a systemic approach.

174 improvements in the quality of discourse on research ethics within their laboratories and enhanced a