The Irregular Terrain of Human Subjects Research Regulations

Hastings Center Report 44 (s3):29-30 (2014)
  Copy   BIBTEX


The overlap and differences between the parallel regulatory systems for research create ample room for confusion and missteps, as discussed by Barbara Bierer and Mark Barnes in their report in this supplement. In practice, beyond the inherent differences in the two systems of regulations themselves, there are many issues that further complicate the application of these regulations. These include the variation in size of the institutions receiving PHS funding, the increased prevalence of multisite research, the allocation of research conduct and oversight to external organizations, and the variability in assignment of human subject protection roles between the IRB and the institution.



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 91,102

External links

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

Through your library

Similar books and articles

De Minimis Risk: A Proposal for a New Category of Research Risk.Abraham Schwab - 2011 - American Journal of Bioethics 11 (11):1-7.
New Rules for Research with Human Participants?Jessica Berg & Nicole Deming - 2011 - Hastings Center Report 41 (6):10-11.
The Misregulation of Research?David B. Resnik - 2015 - Hastings Center Report 45 (6):49-50.
Monitoring research with human subjects.Jeremy Sugarman - 2013 - Journal of Medical Ethics 39 (4):242-242.
Inconsistent Regulatory Protection under the U.S. Common Rule.Barbara J. Evans - 2004 - Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics 13 (4):366-379.
Waiving legal rights in research.David B. Resnik & Efthimios Parasidis - 2014 - Journal of Medical Ethics 40 (7):475-478.


Added to PP

10 (#1,055,677)

6 months
3 (#550,572)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Citations of this work

No citations found.

Add more citations

References found in this work

No references found.

Add more references