23 found
Order:
  1.  30
    The Promise and Reality of Public Engagement in the Governance of Human Genome Editing Research.John M. Conley, R. Jean Cadigan, Arlene M. Davis, Eric T. Juengst, Kriste Kuczynski, Rami Major, Hayley Stancil, Julio Villa-Palomino, Margaret Waltz & Gail E. Henderson - 2023 - American Journal of Bioethics 23 (7):9-16.
    This paper analyses the activities of five organizations shaping the debate over the global governance of genome editing in order to assess current approaches to public engagement (PE). We compare the recommendations of each group with its own practices. All recommend broad engagement with the general public, but their practices vary from expert-driven models dominated by scientists, experts, and civil society groups to citizen deliberation-driven models that feature bidirectional consultation with local citizens, as well as hybrid models that combine elements (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   16 citations  
  2.  34
    Looking for Trouble: Preventive Genomic Sequencing in the General Population and the Role of Patient Choice.Gabriel Lázaro-Muñoz, John M. Conley, Arlene M. Davis, Marcia Van Riper, Rebecca L. Walker & Eric T. Juengst - 2015 - American Journal of Bioethics 15 (7):3-14.
    Advances in genomics have led to calls for developing population-based preventive genomic sequencing programs with the goal of identifying genetic health risks in adults without known risk factors. One critical issue for minimizing the harms and maximizing the benefits of PGS is determining the kind and degree of control individuals should have over the generation, use, and handling of their genomic information. In this article we examine whether PGS programs should offer individuals the opportunity to selectively opt out of the (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   14 citations  
  3.  14
    Clarifying a Clinical Ethics Service’s Value, the Visible and the Hidden.Jane Jankowski, Marycon Chin Jiro, Thomas May, Arlene M. Davis, Kaarkuzhali Babu Krishnamurthy, Kelly Kent, Hannah I. Lipman, Marika Warren & Laura Guidry-Grimes - 2019 - Journal of Clinical Ethics 30 (3):251-261.
    Our aim in this article is to define the difficulties that clinical ethics services encounter when they are asked to demonstrate the value a clinical ethics service (CES) could and should have for an institution and those it serves. The topic emerged out of numerous related presentations at the Un- Conference hosted by the Cleveland Clinic in August 2018 that identified challenges of articulating the value of clinical ethics work for hospital administrators. After a review these talks, it was apparent (...)
    No categories
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   5 citations  
  4.  16
    Consent forms and the therapeutic misconception.Nancy M. P. King, Gail E. Henderson, Larry R. Churchill, Arlene M. Davis, Sara Chandros Hull, Daniel K. Nelson, P. Christy Parham-Vetter, Barbra Bluestone Rothschild, Michele M. Easter & Benjamin S. Wilfond - 2005 - IRB: Ethics & Human Research 27 (1):1-7.
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   19 citations  
  5.  11
    Assessing Benefits in Clinical Research: Why Diversity in Benefit Assessment Can Be Risky.Larry R. Churchill, Daniel K. Nelson, Gail E. Henderson, Nancy M. P. King, Arlene M. Davis, Erin Leahey & Benjamin S. Wilfond - 2003 - IRB: Ethics & Human Research 25 (3):1.
    No categories
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   11 citations  
  6.  32
    A Trade Secret Model for Genomic Biobanking.John M. Conley, Robert Mitchell, R. Jean Cadigan, Arlene M. Davis, Allison W. Dobson & Ryan Q. Gladden - 2012 - Journal of Law, Medicine and Ethics 40 (3):612-629.
    The current ethical norms of genomic biobanking creating and maintaining large repositories of human DNA and/or associated data for biomedical research have generated criticism from every angle, at both the practical and theoretical levels. The traditional research model has involved investigators seeking biospecimens for specific purposes that they can describe and disclose to prospective subjects, from whom they can then seek informed consent. In the case of many biobanks, however, the institution that collects and maintains the biospecimens may not itself (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   6 citations  
  7.  42
    Vulnerability to influence: A two-way street.Gail E. Henderson, Arlene M. Davis & Nancy M. P. King - 2004 - American Journal of Bioethics 4 (3):50 – 52.
  8.  11
    Genomic Research with the Newly Dead: A Crossroads for Ethics and Policy.Rebecca L. Walker, Eric T. Juengst, Warren Whipple & Arlene M. Davis - 2014 - Journal of Law, Medicine and Ethics 42 (2):220-231.
    Research uses of human bodies maintained by mechanical ventilation after being declared dead by neurological criteria, were first published in the early 1980s with a renewed interest in research on the newly or nearly dead occurring in about last decade. While this type of research may take many different forms, recent technologic advances in genomic sequencing along with high hopes for genomic medicine, have inspired interest in genomic research with the newly dead. For example, the Genotype-Tissue Expression program through the (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   3 citations  
  9.  19
    Is Real-Time ELSI Realistic?John M. Conley, Anya E. R. Prince, Arlene M. Davis, Jean Cadigan & Gabriel Lazaro-Munoz - 2020 - AJOB Empirical Bioethics 11 (2):134-144.
    Background: A growing literature has raised—skeptically—the question of whether cutting-edge scientific research can identify and address broader ethical and policy considerations in real time. In genomics, the question is: Can ELSI contribute to genomics in real time, or will it be relegated to its historical role of after-the-fact outsider critique? We address this question against the background of a genomic screening project where we participated as embedded, real-time ELSI researchers and observers, from its initial design through its conclusion.Methods: As part (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  10.  43
    The Invisible Hand in Clinical Research: The Study Coordinator's Critical Role in Human Subjects Protection.Arlene M. Davis, Sara Chandros Hull, Christine Grady, Benjamin S. Wilfond & Gail E. Henderson - 2002 - Journal of Law, Medicine and Ethics 30 (3):411-419.
    Over the past decade, the number of clinical trials registered with the Food and Drug Administration has increased dramatically. The business of clinical research has become more diverse, involving academic institutions, clinician-researchers in community settings, pharmaceutical companies, and contract research organizations. This growth has been accompanied by increasing concerns about the ethical conduct of research. Much of this concern has been directed to procedural issues including institutional review board review, data monitoring, and informed consent forms. However, the protection of human (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   5 citations  
  11.  25
    The Invisible Hand in Clinical Research: The Study Coordinator's Critical Role in Human Subjects Protection.Arlene M. Davis, Sara Chandros Hull, Christine Grady, Benjamin S. Wilfond & Gail E. Henderson - 2002 - Journal of Law, Medicine and Ethics 30 (3):411-419.
    Over the past decade, the number of clinical trials registered with the Food and Drug Administration has increased dramatically. The business of clinical research has become more diverse, involving academic institutions, clinician-researchers in community settings, pharmaceutical companies, and contract research organizations. This growth has been accompanied by increasing concerns about the ethical conduct of research. Much of this concern has been directed to procedural issues including institutional review board review, data monitoring, and informed consent forms. However, the protection of human (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   4 citations  
  12.  16
    Genomic Research with the Newly Dead: A Crossroads for Ethics and Policy.Rebecca L. Walker, Eric T. Juengst, Warren Whipple & Arlene M. Davis - 2014 - Journal of Law, Medicine and Ethics 42 (2):220-231.
    Recent advances in next generation sequencing along with high hopes for genomic medicine have inspired interest in genomic research with the newly dead. However, applicable law does not adequately determine ethical or policy responses to such research. In this paper we propose that such research stands at a crossroads between other more established biomedical clinical and research practices. In addressing the ethical and policy issues raised by a particular research project within our institution comparatively with these other practices, we illustrate (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  13.  18
    Addressing “Difficult Patient” Dilemmas: Possible Alternatives to the Mediation Model.Arlene M. Davis, Michele Rivkin-Fish & Deborah J. Love - 2012 - American Journal of Bioethics 12 (5):13-14.
    The American Journal of Bioethics, Volume 12, Issue 5, Page 13-14, May 2012.
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  14.  18
    Automatic Placement of Genomic Research Results in Medical Records: Do Researchers Have a Duty? Should Participants Have a Choice?Anya E. R. Prince, John M. Conley, Arlene M. Davis, Gabriel Lázaro-Muñoz & R. Jean Cadigan - 2015 - Journal of Law, Medicine and Ethics 43 (4):827-842.
    The growing practice of returning individual results to research participants has revealed a variety of interpretations of the multiple and sometimes conflicting duties that researchers may owe to participants. One particularly difficult question is the nature and extent of a researcher’s duty to facilitate a participant’s follow-up clinical care by placing research results in the participant’s medical record. The question is especially difficult in the context of genomic research. Some recent genomic research studies — enrolling patients as participants — boldly (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  15.  23
    Scientific Social Responsibility: Lessons From the Corporate Social Responsibility Movement.John M. Conley, Gabriel Lázaro-Muñoz, Anya E. R. Prince, Arlene M. Davis & R. Jean Cadigan - 2015 - American Journal of Bioethics 15 (12):64-66.
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  16.  15
    Exception from Informed Consent for Emergency Research: Drawing on Existing Skills and Experience.Arlene M. Davis - 1998 - IRB: Ethics & Human Research 20 (5):1.
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  17.  26
    Confidentiality: More than a Linkage File and a Locked Drawer.Michele M. Easter, Arlene M. Davis & Gail E. Henderson - 2004 - IRB: Ethics & Human Research 26 (2):13.
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  18.  13
    One Goal, Two Roles: Clinicians and Clinical Ethicists Should Approach Patients’ Ambivalence Differently.Mx Bex L. Forcier, Benny L. Joyner Jr & Arlene M. Davis - 2022 - American Journal of Bioethics 22 (6):50-52.
    With their comprehensive categorization of “ambivalence-related phenomena,” Moore et al. helpfully clarify and contextualize these decisional states as they arise in patient care. Given the...
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  19.  19
    Response to Open Peer Commentaries on “Looking for Trouble: Preventive Genomic Sequencing in the General Population and the Role of Patient Choice”.Gabriel Lázaro-Muñoz, John M. Conley, Arlene M. Davis, Marcia Van Riper, Rebecca L. Walker & Eric T. Juengst - 2015 - American Journal of Bioethics 15 (12):6-9.
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  20.  17
    Reconsidering scarce drug rationing: implications for clinical research.Zev M. Nakamura, Douglas P. MacKay, Arlene M. Davis, Elizabeth R. Brassfield, Benny L. Joyner Jr & Donald L. Rosenstein - 2021 - Journal of Medical Ethics 47 (12):e16-e16.
    Hospital systems commonly face the challenge of determining just ways to allocate scarce drugs during national shortages. There is no standardised approach of how this should be instituted, but principles of distributive justice are commonly used so that patients who are most likely to benefit from the drug receive it. As a result, clinical indications, in which the evidence for the drug is assumed to be established, are often prioritised over research use. In this manuscript, we present a case of (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  21.  24
    Automatic Placement of Genomic Research Results in Medical Records: Do Researchers Have a Duty? Should Participants Have a Choice?Anya E. R. Prince, John M. Conley, Arlene M. Davis, Gabriel Lázaro-Muñoz & R. Jean Cadigan - 2015 - Journal of Law, Medicine and Ethics 43 (4):827-842.
    The growing practice of returning individual results to research participants has revealed a variety of interpretations of the multiple and sometimes conflicting duties that researchers may owe to participants. One particularly difficult question is the nature and extent of a researcher’s duty to facilitate a participant’s follow-up clinical care by placing research results in the participant’s medical record. The question is especially difficult in the context of genomic research. Some recent genomic research studies — enrolling patients as participants — boldly (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  22.  7
    “Death and Taxes”: Why Financial Compensation for Research Participants is an Economic and Legal Risk.Margaret Waltz, Arlene M. Davis & Jill A. Fisher - 2023 - Journal of Law, Medicine and Ethics 51 (2):413-425.
    In the US, research payments are technically taxable income. This article argues that tax liability is a form of possible economic and legal risk of paid research participation. Findings are presented from empirical research on Phase I healthy volunteer trials. The article concludes by discussing the implications of these findings for the informed consent process, as well as for broader ethical issues in whether and how payments for research participation should be regulated.
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  23.  16
    Exploring the Emotional Labor of Medical Trainees in the Setting of Ethics Education.Margaret Waltz, R. Jean Cadigan & Arlene M. Davis - 2019 - American Journal of Bioethics 19 (12):65-66.
    Julie Childers and Bob Arnold’s (2019) article, “The Inner Lives of Doctors: Physician Emotion in the Care of the Seriously Ill,” uses Kübler-Ross’s influential work on death and dying to remind us...
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark