Response to Open Peer Commentaries: On Social Harms, Big Tech, and Institutional Accountability

, &
American Journal of Bioethics 22 (10):6-8 (2022)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

The authors offer their sincere thanks to all of the commentators for taking the time to comment on our work ; one of the advantages of the AJOB format is immediate feedback,...

Categories

Keywords

Reprint years

DOI

10.1080/15265161.2022.2075977

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 91,783

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

Response to Open Peer Commentaries on “Assessing the Likely Harms to Kidney Vendors in Regulated Organ Markets”.Julian Koplin - 2014 - American Journal of Bioethics 14 (10):1-3.
Response to Open Peer Commentaries on “An Open Letter to Institutional Review Boards Considering Northfield Laboratories' PolyHeme® Trial”: The Emergency Exception and Unproven/unsatisfactory Treatment.Ken Kipnis, Nancy M. P. King & Robert M. Nelson - 2006 - American Journal of Bioethics 6 (3):W49-W50.
Response to Open Peer Commentaries on “An Open Letter to Institutional Review Boards Considering Northfield Laboratories' PolyHeme® Trial ”: The Emergency Exception and Unproven/Unsatisfactory Treatment.Ken Kipnis, Nancy M. P. King & Robert M. Nelson - 2006 - American Journal of Bioethics 6 (3):W49-W50.
Access to Expanded Prenatal Genetic Testing: Response to Open Peer Commentaries.Michelle J. Bayefsky & Benjamin E. Berkman - 2022 - American Journal of Bioethics 22 (5):1-3.
Islamic Goals for Clinical Treatment at the End of Life: The Concept of Accountability Before God (Taklīf) Remains Useful: Response to Open Peer Commentaries on “Ethical Obligations and Clinical Goals in End-of-Life Care: Deriving a Quality-of-Life Construct Based on the Islamic Concept of Accountability Before God (Taklīf)”.Aasim Padela & Afshan Mohiuddin - 2015 - American Journal of Bioethics 15 (1):1-8.
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 “How to Do Research Fairly in an Unjust World”.Angela J. Ballantyne - 2010 - American Journal of Bioethics 10 (6):4-6.
Health and Social Justice: Which Inequalities Matter ? Response to Open Peer Commentaries on “The Social Determinants of Health: Why Should We Care?”.Adina Preda & Kristin Voigt - 2015 - American Journal of Bioethics 15 (8):1-3.
Response to Open Peer Commentaries on “Neuroethics: A New Way of Doing Ethics”.Neil Levy - 2011 - American Journal of Bioethics Neuroscience 2 (2):W1-W4.
Response to Open Peer Commentaries on “Health Research Priority Setting: The Duties of Individual Funders”.Leah Pierson & Joseph Millum - 2019 - American Journal of Bioethics 19 (1):W5-W7.
Response to open Peer commentaries on “why treat the wounded?”.Michael L. Gross - 2008 - American Journal of Bioethics 8 (2):W1 – W3.
Deidentification and Its Discontents: Response to the Open Peer Commentaries.Mark A. Rothstein - 2010 - American Journal of Bioethics 10 (9):W1-W2.
Response to open Peer commentaries on “must research participants understand randomization?”.David Wendler - 2009 - American Journal of Bioethics 9 (2):W1 – W2.
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 “Moral Hazard in Pediatrics”.Donald Brunnquell & Christopher M. Michaelson - 2016 - American Journal of Bioethics 16 (8):3-4.

Analytics

Added to PP
2022-05-20

Downloads
15 (#944,758)

6 months
7 (#425,099)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Elizabeth Stephenson
Purdue University Calumet

Citations of this work

No citations found.

Add more citations

References found in this work

View all 9 references / Add more references