Regulating “Higher Risk, No Direct Benefit” Studies in Minors

, , &
American Journal of Bioethics 11 (6):29 - 31 (2011)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

The American Journal of Bioethics, Volume 11, Issue 6, Page 29-31, June 2011

Categories

Keywords

Reprint years

DOI

10.1080/15265161.2011.566669

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 91,423

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

Acceptable risks and burdens for children in research without direct benefit: a systematic analysis of the decisions made by the Dutch Central Committee.A. E. Westra, R. N. Sukhai, J. M. Wit, I. D. de Beaufort & A. F. Cohen - 2010 - Journal of Medical Ethics 36 (7):420-424.
The Dangers of Using a Relative Risk Standard for Minimal Risk.Seema Shah - 2011 - American Journal of Bioethics 11 (6):22 - 23.
Why Even Inappropriate Parental Consent Might Be Enough to Justify Minimal Risk Pediatric Research Without Clinical Benefit.David Hunter - 2012 - American Journal of Bioethics 12 (1):35 - 36.
Uniqueness, Exploitation, and Relative Risk Standards in Adolescent Research.Janet Malek - 2011 - American Journal of Bioethics 11 (6):23 - 25.
The Concept of Minimal Risk: The Need for Better Guidance on the Ethics Review Process.Kyoko Wada - 2011 - American Journal of Bioethics 11 (6):27 - 29.
Minimal Risk Remains an Open Question.Ariella Binik, Charles Weijer & Mark Sheehan - 2011 - American Journal of Bioethics 11 (6):25 - 27.
Why We Don't Need a Relative Risk Standard for Adolescent HIV Vaccine Trials in South Africa.Catherine M. Slack - 2011 - American Journal of Bioethics 11 (6):21 - 22.
A Relative Standard for Minimal Risk is Unnecessary and Potentially Harmful to Children: Lessons from the Phambili Trial.Robert M. Nelson - 2011 - American Journal of Bioethics 11 (6):14 - 16.
When can children with conditions be in no-benefit, higher-Hazard pediatric studies?Loretta M. Kopelman - 2007 - American Journal of Bioethics 7 (3):15 – 17.
The harm-benefit tradeoff in "bad deal" trials.Gillian Nycum & Lynette Reid - 2007 - Kennedy Institute of Ethics Journal 17 (4):321-350.
Research involving prisoners: Consensus and controversies in international and european regulations.Bernice S. Elger - 2008 - Bioethics 22 (4):224–238.
Convening a 407 panel for research not otherwise approvable: "Precursors to diabetes in japanese american youth" as a case study.Lainie Friedman Ross - 2004 - Kennedy Institute of Ethics Journal 14 (2):165-186.
Response to Open Peer Commentaries on “Relative Versus Absolute Standards for Everyday Risk in Adolescent HIV Prevention Trials: Expanding the Debate”.Jeremy Snyder, Cari L. Miller & Glenda Gray - 2011 - American Journal of Bioethics 11 (6):W1 - W3.
Risk and distributive justice: The case of regulating new technologies.Maria Paola Ferretti - 2010 - Science and Engineering Ethics 16 (3): 501-515.

Analytics

Added to PP
2011-06-15

Downloads
24 (#642,030)

6 months
1 (#1,516,429)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Citations of this work

Anything Goes? Analyzing Varied Understandings of Assent.Giles Birchley - 2023 - Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics 32 (1):76-89.

Add more citations

References found in this work

Minimal risk as an international ethical standard in research.Loretta M. Kopelman - 2004 - Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 29 (3):351 – 378.
The Ethics of Pediatric Research.David Wendler - 2010 - Oxford University Press.

View all 11 references / Add more references