Response to Open Peer Commentaries: When Is It Ethical for Physician-Investigators to Seek Consent From Their Own Patients?

, &
American Journal of Bioethics 19 (5):W3-W4 (2019)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

Volume 19, Issue 5, May 2019, Page W3-W4.

Categories

Keywords

Reprint years

DOI

10.1080/15265161.2019.1591543

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 91,897

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

My notes

Similar books and articles

When Is It Ethical for Physician-Investigators to Seek Consent From Their Own Patients?Stephanie R. Morain, Steven Joffe & Emily A. Largent - 2019 - American Journal of Bioethics 19 (4):11-18.
An Unbiased Response to the Open Peer Commentaries on “Does Consent Bias Research?”.Mark A. Rothstein & Abigail B. Shoben - 2013 - American Journal of Bioethics 13 (4):W1 - W4.
Response to Open Peer Commentaries on “A Decisional Analysis of Consent”.Jonathan Baron - 2006 - American Journal of Bioethics 6 (3):W51-W53.
Response to Open Peer Commentaries on “Placebo Effects and Informed Consent”.Mark Alfano - 2015 - American Journal of Bioethics 15 (10):1-3.
Trustworthiness in Untrustworthy Times: Response to Open Peer Commentaries on Beyond Consent.Stephanie A. Kraft, Mildred K. Cho, Katherine Gillespie, Nina Varsava, Kelly E. Ormond, Benjamin S. Wilfond & Sandra Soo-Jin Lee - 2018 - American Journal of Bioethics 18 (5):W6-W8.
Response to Open Peer Commentaries on “Why Consent May Not Be Needed For Organ Procurement”.James Delaney & David B. Hershenov - 2009 - American Journal of Bioethics 9 (8):1-2.
Response to Open Peer Commentaries on “Informed Consent Revisited: Japan and the US”.Akira Akabayashi & Brian Taylor Slingsby - 2006 - American Journal of Bioethics 6 (1):W27-W28.
Response to Open Peer Commentaries on "Defining the Scope of Implied Consent in the Emergency Department".Mark Graber & Raul Easton - 2007 - American Journal of Bioethics 7 (12):3-4.
Response to Open Peer Commentaries on “Addressing Consent Issues in Donation After Circulatory Determination of Death”.Kim J. Overby, Michael S. Weinstein & Autumn Fiester - 2015 - American Journal of Bioethics 15 (9):3-5.
Nudging in Context: Response to Open Peer Commentaries on “Nudging and Informed Consent”.Shlomo Cohen - 2013 - American Journal of Bioethics 13 (11):W1 - W6.
Response to Open Peer Commentaries for “Ethical Challenges Within Veterans Administration Healthcare Facilities: Perspectives of Managers, Clinicians, Patients, and Ethics Committee Chairpersons”.Mary Beth Foglia, Robert A. Pearlman, Melissa Bottrell, Jane K. Altemose & Ellen Fox - 2009 - American Journal of Bioethics 9 (4):3-4.
Response to Open Peer Commentaries on “The Ethical 'Elephant' in the Death Penalty 'Room”'.Michael Keane - 2008 - American Journal of Bioethics 8 (10):5-6.
A Response to the Open Peer Commentaries on “Patient and Citizen Participation in Health: The Need for Improved Ethical Support”.Laura Williamson - 2014 - American Journal of Bioethics 14 (12):W1 - W5.
Consent to open label extension studies: some ethical issues.P. Wainwright - 2002 - Journal of Medical Ethics 28 (6):373-376.
Response to Open Peer Commentaries on “Community Members as Recruiters of Human Subjects: Ethical Considerations”.Christian Simon & Maghboeba Mosavel - 2010 - American Journal of Bioethics 10 (3):1-3.

Analytics

Added to PP
2019-05-09

Downloads
18 (#832,892)

6 months
6 (#520,798)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Citations of this work

Researchers Experience Moral Distress Too!Cynthia M. A. Geppert & Toby Schonfeld - 2021 - American Journal of Bioethics 21 (4):100-101.

Add more citations

References found in this work

No references found.

Add more references