SteinbrookR., “Protecting Research Subjects – the Crisis at Johns Hopkins,”New England Journal of Medicine346, no. 9 (2002): 716–720.
2.
AlbaneseA., “Could Librarians' Help Have Prevented Hopkins Tragedy?”Library Journal126, no. 15 (2001): 16; RobinsonJ.G. and GehleJ.L., “Medical Research and the Institutional Review Board: The Librarian's Role in Human Subject Testing,”Reference Services Review33, no. 1 (2005): 20–24.
3.
See Steinbrook, supra note 1.
4.
The National Commission for the Protection of Human Subjects of Biomedical and Behavioral Research, Ethical Principles and Guidelines for the Protection of Human Subjects of Research (Belmont Report), DHEW Publication OS78–0012, Washington, D.C., September 30, 1978.
5.
See National Commission, supra note 4.
6.
SieberJ.E., “Empirical Research on Research Ethics,”Ethics and Behavior14, no. 6 (2004): 397–412; SieberJ.E., “The Evolution of Best Ethical Practices in Human Research,”Journal of Empirical Research on Human Research Ethics1, no. 1 (2006): 1–2.
7.
KonA. A., “The Role of Empirical Research in Bioethics,”American Journal of Bioethics9, No. 6-7 (2009): 59–65; SugarmanJ. and SulmasyD.P., eds., Methods in Medical Ethics, 2nd ed. (Washington, D.C.: Georgetown University Press, 2010).
8.
CandilisP.J.LidzC.W., and ArnoldR.M., “The Need to Understand IRB Deliberations,”IRB: Ethics & Human Research28, no. 1 (2006): 1–6.
9.
DickertN.EmanuelE., and GradyC., “Paying Research Subjects: An Analysis of Current Policies,”Annals of Internal Medicine136, no. 5 (2002): 368–73; WolfL.E., “IRB Policies Regarding Finder's Fees and Role Conflicts in Recruiting Research Participants,”IRB: Ethics & Human Research31, no. 1 (2009): 14–19.
10.
CampbellE.G.WeissmanJ.S., and ClarridgeB., “Characteristics of Medical School Faculty Members Serving on Institutional Review Boards: Results of a National Survey,”Academic Medicine78, no. 8 (2003): 831–36; de VriesR.G. and ForsbergC.P., “What Do IRBs Look Like? What Kind of Support Do They Receive?”Accountability in Research9, No. 3-4 (2002): 199–216; de VriesR.G. and ForsbergC.P., “Who Decides? A Look at Ethics Committee Membership,”HEC Forum14, no. 3 (2002): 252–8; HayesG.J.HayesS.C., and DykstraT., “A Survey of University Institutional Review Boards: Characteristics, Policies, and Procedures,”IRB: Ethics and Human Research17, no. 3 (1995): 1–6; LemmensT. and ThompsonA., “Noninstitutional Commercial Review Boards in North America: A Critical Appraisal and Comparison with IRBs,”IRB: Ethics & Human Research23, no. 2 (2001): 1–12.
11.
ByrneM.M.SpeckmanJ.GetzK., and SugarmanJ., “Variability in the Costs of Institutional Review Board Oversight,”Academic Medicine81, no. 3 (2006): 708–12; CataniaJ.A.WolfL.E.WertleibS.LoB., and HenneJ., “Research Participants' Perceptions of the Certificate of Confidentiality's Assurances and Limitations,”Journal of Empirical Research on Human Research Ethics2, no. 4 (2007): 53–59; SpeckmanJ.L.ByrneM.M., and GersonJ., “Determining the Costs of Institutional Review Boards,”IRB: Ethics and Human Research29, no. 2 (2007): 7–13; WagnerT.H.CruzA.M.E., and ChadwickG.L., “Economies of Scale in Institutional Review Boards,”Medical Care42, no. 8 (2004): 817–23.
12.
BurmanW.BreeseP., and WeisS., “The Effects of Local Review on Informed Consent Documents from a Multicenter Clinical Trials Consortium,”Controlled Clinical Trials24, no. 3 (2003): 245–55; McWilliamsR.Hoover-FongJ., and HamoshA., “Problematic Variation in Local Institutional Review of a Multicenter Genetic Epidemiology Study,”JAMA290, no. 3 (2003): 360–66; SilvermanH.HullS.C., and SugarmanJ., “Variability among Institutional Review Boards' Decisions within the Context of a Multicenter Trial,”Critical Care Medicine29, no. 2 (2001): 235–41.
13.
FisherC.B.KornetskyS. Z., and PrenticeE.D., “Determining Risk in Pediatric Research with No Prospect of Direct Benefit: Time for a National Consensus on the Interpretation of Federal Regulations,”American Journal of Bioethics7, no. 3 (2007): 5–10; ShahS.WhittleA.WilfondB.GenslerG., and WendlerD., “How Do Institutional Review Boards Apply the Federal Risk and Benefit Standards for Pediatric Research?,”JAMA291, no. 4 (2004): 476–82.
14.
BrendelD.H. and MillerF. G., “A Plea for Pragmatism in Clinical Research Ethics,”American Journal of Bioethics8, no. 4 (2008): 24–31.
15.
AbbottL. and GradyC., “A Systematic Review of the Empirical Literature Evaluating IRBs: What We Know and What We Still Need to Learn,”Journal of Empirical Research on Human Research Ethics6, no. 1 (2011): 3–20.
16.
Id.
17.
EdwardsS.J.L.AshcroftR., and KirchinS., “Research Ethics Committees: Differences and Moral Judgment,”Bioethics18, no. 5 (2004): 408–27; FostN., “IRB Inconsistency: Be Careful What You Wish For,”American Journal of Bioethics Primary Research2, no. 2 (2011): 37–38.
18.
KlitzmanR., “The Myth of Community Differences as the Cause of Variations among IRBs,”American Journal of Bioethics Primary Research2, no. 2 (2011): 24–33; PritchardI.A., “How Do IRB Members Make Decisions? A Review and Research Agenda,”Journal of Empirical Research on Human Research Ethics6, no. 2 (2011): 31–46.
19.
RidA.EmanuelE.J., and WendlerE., “Evaluating the Risks of Clinical Research,”JAMA304, no. 13 (2010): 1472–79; Pritchard, supra note 18.
20.
See Klitzman, supra note 18: at 29.
21.
FendrichM.LippertA.M., and JohnsonT.P., “Respondent Reactions to Sensitive Questions,”Journal of Empirical Research on Human Research Ethics2, no.3 (2007): 31–37; RojasA. and KinderB.N., “Effects of Completing Sexual Questionnaires in Males and Females with Histories of Childhood Sexual Abuse: Implications for Institutional Review Boards,”Journal of Sex & Marital Therapy33, no. 3 (2007): 193–201.
22.
LuebbertR.TaitR. C.ChibnallJ.T., and DeshieldsT. L., “IRB Member Judgments of Decisional Capacity, Coercion, and Risk in Medical and Psychiatric Studies,”Journal of Empirical Research on Human Research Ethics3, no. 1 (2008): 15–24; TaitR.C.ChibnallJ. T.IltisA.S.WallA., and DeshieldsT. L., “Assessment of Consent Capability in Psychiatric and Medical Studies,”Journal of Empirical Research on Human Research Ethics6, no. 1 (2011): 39–50.
23.
AndersonE.E., “A Qualitative Study of Non-Affiliated, Non-Scientist Institutional Review Board Members,”Accountability in Research13, no. 2 (2006): 135–55; SenguptaS. and LoB., “The Roles and Experiences of Nonaffiliated and Non-Scientist Members of Institutional Review Boards,”Academic Medicine78, no. 2 (2003): 212–18.
24.
SirotinN.WolfL.E., and PollackL.M., “IRBs and Ethically Challenging Protocols: Views of IRB Chairs about Useful Resources,”IRB: Ethics & Human Research32, no. 5 (2010): 10–19.
25.
RothsteinW.G. and PhuongL.H., “Ethical Attitudes of Nurse, Physician, and Unaffiliated Members of Institutional Review Boards,”Journal of Nursing Scholarship39, no. 1 (2007): 75–81; Anderson, supra note 23.
26.
45 C.F.R. § 46.107 (1999).
27.
See Anderson, supra note 23.
28.
See Sirotin, supra note 24.
29.
Id.
30.
SackettD.L.RosenbergW.M.GrayJ.A.HaynesR.B., and RichardsonW.S., “Evidence Based Medicine: What It Is and What It Isn't,”British Medical Journal312, no. 7023 (1996): 71–72.
31.
RosenbergW.M. and DonaldA., “Evidence Based Medicine: An Approach to Clinical Problem-Solving,”British Medical Journal310, no. 6987 (1995): 1122–26.
32.
DawesM.SummerskillW., and GlasziouP., “Sicily Statement on Evidence-Based Practice,”BMC Medical Education5, no. 1 (2005).
33.
AndersonE.E. and DuBoisJ.M., “The Need for Evidence-Based Research Ethics: A Review of the Substance Abuse Literature,”Drug and Alcohol Dependence86, No. 2-3 (2007): 95–105; BeaganB. and McDonaldM., “Evidence-Based Practice of Research Ethics Review,”Health Law Review13, no. 2 & 3 (2005): 62–68; DuBoisJ.M.VolpeR.L., and RangelE.K., “Hidden Empirical Research Ethics: A Review of Three Health Journals from 2005 through 2006,”Journal of Empirical Research on Human Research Ethics3, no. 3 (2008): 7–18; McDonaldM. and CoxS., “Moving toward Evidence-Based Human Participant Protection,”Journal of Academic Ethics7, no. 1 (2009): 1–16; SiminoffL.A.CaputoM., and BurantC., “The Promise of Empirical Research in the Study of Informed Consent Theory and Practice,”HEC Forum16, no. 1 (2004): 53–71; SolomonM.Z., “Realizing Bioethics' Goals in Practice: Ten Ways “Is” Can Help “Ought”,”Hastings Center Report35, no. 4 (2005): 40–47; SugarmanJ., “The Future of Empirical Research in Bioethics,”Journal of Law, Medicine & Ethics32, no. 2 (2004): 226–31; Sieber, supra note 6.
34.
CookD.J.JaeschkeR., and GuyattG.H., “Critical Appraisal of Therapeutic Interventions in the Intensive Care Unit: Human Monoclonal Antibody Treatment in Sepsis. Journal Club of the Hamilton Regional Critical Care Group,”Journal of Intensive Care Medicine7, no. 6 (1992): 2752–82.
35.
DuBoisJ.M., “What Counts as Empirical Research in Bioethics and Where Do We Find the Stuff?”American Journal of Bioethics9, No. 6-7 (2009): 70–72, at 71.
36.
DuBoisJ.M.BanteH., and HadleyW.B., “Ethics in Psychiatric Research: A Review of 25 Years of NIH-Funded Empirical Research Projects,”American Journal of Bioethics Primary Research2, no. 4 (2011): 5–17.
37.
FloryJ. and EmanuelE.J., “Interventions to Improve Research Participants' Understanding in Informed Consent for Research,”JAMA292, no. 13 (2004): 1593–1601; SugarmanJ.McCroryD. C., and PowellD., “Empirical Research on Informed Consent. An Annotated Bibliography,”The Hastings Center Report29, no. 1 (1999): S1–42; Siminoff, supra note 33.
38.
DunnL.B.NowrangiM.A.PalmerB.W.JesteD. V., and SaksE.R., “Assessing Decisional Capacity for Clinical Research or Treatment: A Review of Instruments,”American Journal of Psychiatry163, no. 8 (2006): 1323–34; JesteD.V.PalmerB. W., and AppelbaumP.S., “A New Brief Instrument for Assessing Decisional Capacity for Clinical Research,”Archives of General Psychiatry64, no. 8 (2007): 966–74.
39.
KatzR.V.WangM.Q., and GreenB.L., “Participation in Biomedical Research Studies and Cancer Screenings: Perceptions of Risks to Minorities Compared with Whites,”Cancer Control15, no. 4 (2008): 344–51; RobertsL.W.HammondGreen K.A., and HoopJ.G., “An Inverse Relationship between Perceived Harm and Participation Willingness in Schizophrenia Research Protocols,”American Journal of Psychiatry161, no. 11 (2006): 2002–04; RussellS.L.KatzR.V., and KressinN.R., “Beliefs of Women's Risk as Research Subjects: A Four-City Study Examining Differences by Sex and by Race/Ethnicity,”Journal of Women's Health18, no. 2 (2009): 235–43.
40.
TaylorP.J.AwenatY., and GoodingP., “The Subjective Experience of Participation in Schizophrenia Research: A Practical and Ethical Issue,”The Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease198, no. 5 (2010): 343–8; UnguruY.SillA.M., and KamaniN., “The Experiences of Children Enrolled in Pediatric Oncology Research: Implications for Assent,”Pediatrics125, no. 4 (2010): E876-e83.
41.
CataniaJ.A.WolfL.E.WertleibS.LoB., and HenneJ., “Research Participants' Perceptions of the Certificate of Confidentiality's Assurances and Limitations,”Journal of Empirical Research on Human Research Ethics2, no. 4 (2007): 53–59; FestingerD.S.DugoshK. L.CroftJ.R.ArabiaP.L., and MarloweD.B., “Do Research Intermediaries Reduce Perceived Coercion to Enter Research Trials among Criminally Involved Substance Abusers?”Ethics & Behavior21, no. 3 (2011): 252–59; RobertsL.W.WarnerT.D.AndersonC.T.SmithpeterM.V., and RogersM.K., “Schizophrenia Research Participants' Responses to Protocol Safeguards: Recruitment, Consent, and Debriefing,”Schizophrenia Research67, No. 2-3 (2004): 283–91.
42.
DunnL.B.CandilisP.J., and RobertsL.W., “Emerging Empirical Evidence on the Ethics of Schizophrenia Research,”Schizophrenia Bulletin32, no. 1 (2006): 47–68.
43.
RipleyE.B.D., “A Review of Paying Research Participants: It's Time to Move Beyond the Ethical Debate,”Journal of Empirical Research on Human Research Ethics1, no. 4 (2006): 9–20.
44.
DuboisJ.M., “Hidden Data for Research Ethicists: An Introduction to the Concept and a Series of Papers,”Journal of Empirical Research on Human Research Ethics3, no. 3 (2008): 3–5.
45.
AndersonEE and IltisAS, “Assessing and Improving Research Participants' Understanding of Risk: Potential Lessons From the Literature on Physician-Patient Risk Communication,”Journal of Empirical Research on Human Research Ethics3, no. 3 (2008): 27–37.
46.
See Robinson and Gehle, supra note 2.
47.
JesteD.V.PalmerB. W., and GolshanS., “Multimedia Consent for Research in People with Schizophrenia and Normal Subjects: A Randomized Controlled Trial,”Schizophrenia Bulletin35, no. 4 (2009): 719–29; RubrightJ.SankarP., and CasarettD.J., “A Memory and Organizational Aid Improves Ad Research Consent Capacity: Results of a Randomized, Controlled Trial,”American Journal of Geriatric Psychiatry18, no. 12 (2010): 1124–32; StunkelL.BensonM., and McLellanL., “Comprehension and Informed Consent: Assessing the Effect of a Short Consent Form,”IRB: Ethics & Human Research32, no. 4 (2010): 1–9.
48.
MonshiB., and ZieglmayerV., “The Problem of Privacy in Transcultural Research: Reflections on an Ethnographic Study in Sri Lanka,”Ethics and Behavior14, no. 4 (2004): 305–312.
49.
De VriesR.O.B. and GordijnB., “Empirical Ethics and Its Alleged Meta-Ethical Fallacies,”Bioethics23, no. 4 (2009): 193–201; TancrediL.R., “The Limits of Empirical Studies on Research Ethics,”Ethics and Behavior5, no. 3 (1995): 217–36.
50.
See, for example <www.cochrane.org> (last visited December 10, 2012).
51.
See McDonald and Cox, supra note 33.
52.
See Dawes, supra note 32, at 2.
53.
See Dawes, supra note 32, at 2.
54.
BurrisS. and DavisC., “Assessing Social Risks Prior to Commencement of a Clinical Trial: Due Diligence or Ethical Inflation?”American Journal of Bioethics9, no. 11 (2009): 48–54.
55.
FestingerD.S.MarloweD. B.DugoshK. L.CroftJ.R., and ArabiaP.L., “Higher Magnitude Cash Payments Improve Research Follow-up Rates without Increasing Drug Use or Perceived Coercion,”Drug and Alcohol Dependence96, No. 1-2 (2008): 128–35; ThurstoneC.Salomensen-SautelS., and RiggsP.D., “How Adolescents with Substance Use Disorder Spend Research Payments,”Drug and Alcohol Dependence111, no. 3 (2010): 262–64.
56.
DempseyJ.P.BackS.E.WaldropA.E.JenkinsL., and BradyK.T., “The Influence of Monetary Compensation on Relapse among Addicted Participants: Empirical Vs. Anecdotal Evidence,”The American Journal on Addictions17, no. 6 (2008): 488–90; DuBoisJ.M.O'LearyCallahan C., and CottlerL., “The Attitudes of Females in Drug Court toward Additional Safeguards in HIV Prevention Research,”Prevention Science10, no. 4 (2009): 345–52; FestingerD.S.MarloweD.B., and CroftJ.R., “Do Research Payments Precipitate Drug Use or Coerce Participation?”Drug and Alcohol Dependence78, no. 3 (2005): 275–81; OranskyM.FisherC.B.MahadevanM., and SingerM., “Barriers and Opportunities for Recruitment for Nonintervention Studies on HIV Risk: Perspectives of Street Drug Users,”Substance Use & Misuse44, no. 11 (2009): 1642–59; SlomkaJ.McCurdyS.RatliffE.TimpsonS., and WilliamsM., “Perceptions of Financial Payment for Research Participation among African-American Drug Users in HIV Studies,”Journal of General Internal Medicine22, no. 10 (2007): 1403–09.
57.
See Festinger, 2008, supra note 55; Festinger, 2005, supra note 56.
58.
See Dempseysupra note 56.
59.
See Thurstonesupra note 55.
60.
See DuBois, 2009, supra note 56; Oransky, supra note 56; Slomka, supra note 56.
61.
ByrneM.M.CroftJ.R.FrenchM.T.DugoshK.L., and FestingerD.S., “Development and Preliminary Results of the Financial Incentive Coercion Assessment Questionnaire,”Journal of Substance Abuse Treatment (2011) EPub ahead of print.
62.
See Festinger, 2008, supra note 55; Festinger, 2005, supra note 56.
63.
See Festinger, 2008, supra note 55.
64.
See Dempsey, supra note 56.
65.
See Dempsey, supra note 56; Thurstone, supra note 55.
66.
See Thurstone, supra note 55.
67.
See Oransky, supra note 56; Slomka, supra note 56.
68.
See DuBois, 2009, supra note 56.
69.
See Oransky, supra note 56; Slomka, supra note 56.
70.
See Festinger, 2008, supra note 55; Festinger, 2005, supra note 56.
71.
BeanS.HenryB., and KinseyJ.M., “Enhancing Research Ethics Decision-Making: An REB Decision-Bank,”IRB: Ethics & Human Research32, no. 6 (2010): 9–12.
72.
MurphyJ.ScottJ., and KaufmanD., “Public Perspectives on Informed Consent for Biobanking,”American Journal of Public Health99, no. 12 (2009): 2128–34.
73.
MurphyJ.ScottJ., and KaufmanD., “Public Expectations for Return of Results from Large-Cohort Genetic Research,”American Journal of Bioethics8, no. 11 (2008): 36–43.
74.
PulleyJ.BraceM.BernardG., and MasysD., “Attitudes and Perceptions of Patients Towards Methods of Establishing a DNA Biobank,”Cell and Tissue Banking9, no. 1 (2008): 55–65; BrothersK.B.MorrisonD. R., and ClaytonE. W., “Two Large-Scale Surveys on Community Attitudes toward an Opt-out Biobank,”American Journal of Medical Genetics155, no. 12 (2011): 2982–2990.
75.
HagaS. B. and O'DanielJ., “Public Perspectives Regarding Data-Sharing Practices in Genomics Research,”Public Health Genomics14, no. 6 (2011): 319–24; McGuireA.L.HamiltonJ.A.LunstrothR.McCulloughL.B., and GoldmanA., “DNA Data Sharing: Research Participants' Perspectives,”Genetics and Medicine10, no. 1 (2008): 46–53.
76.
PentzR.D.BillotL., and WendlerD., “Research on Stored Biological Samples: Views of African American and White American Cancer Patients,”American Journal of Medical Genetics140A, no. 7 (2006): 733–39; SimonC.M.L'HeureuxJ., and MurrayJ.C., “Active Choice but Not Too Active: Public Perspectives on Biobank Consent Models,”Genetics in Medicine13, no. 9 (2011): 821–31; See Murphy, 2009, supra note 70.
77.
LemkeA. A.WolfW. A.Hebert-BeirneJ., and SmithM. E., “Public and Biobank Participant Attitudes toward Genetic Research Participation and Data Sharing,”Public Health Genomics13, no. 6 (2010): 368–77; See Murphy, 2009 at supra note 70; See Simon, at supra note 70.
78.
BeskowL.M. and DeanE., “Informed Consent for Biorepositories: Assessing Prospective Participants' Understanding and Opinions,”Cancer Epidemiology Biomarkers and Prevention17, no. 6 (2008): 1440–51.
79.
ChenD.T.RosensteinD. L.MuthappanP.HilsenbeckS.G.MillerF.G.EmanuelE.J.WendlerD., “Research with Stored Biological Samples: What Do Research Participants Want?”Archives of Internal Medicine165, no. 6 (2005): 652–55; MaloneT.CatalanoP.J.O'DwyerP.J.GiantonioB., “High Rate of Consent to Bank Biologic Samples for Future Research: The Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Experience,”Journal of the National Cancer Institute94, no. 10 (2002): 769–71.
80.
BeskowL. M.FriedmanJ. Y.HardyN. C.LinL., and WeinfurtK. P.. “Simplifying Informed Consent for Biorepositories: Stakeholder Perspectives,”Genetics in Medicine12, no. 9 (2010): 567–72.
81.
See Chen, supra note 79; Malone, et al., supra note 79.
82.
See Beskow and Deansupra note 78; Murphy, 2009, supra note 72; Simon, supra note 72.
83.
See Lemke, supra note 77.
84.
See Malone, supra note 79; Murphy, 2009, supra note 72; Pentz, supra note 76.
85.
Beskow, 2010, supra note 80.
86.
Abou-NassarK.KovacsM.J., and KahnS.R., “The Effect of Dalteparin on Coagulation Activation During Pregnancy in Women with Thrombophilia: A Randomized Trial,”Thrombosis and Haemostasis98, no. 1 (2007): 163–71; BrennerB.HoffmanR.CarpH.DulitskyM., and YounisJ., “Efficacy and Safety of Two Doses of Enoxaparin in Women with Thrombophilia and Recurrent Pregnancy Loss: The Live-Enox Study,”Journal of Thrombosis and Haemostasis3, no. 2 (2005): 227–29; DendrinosS.KalogirouI., and MakrakisE., “Safety and Effectiveness of Tinzaparin Sodium in the Management of Recurrent Pregnancy Loss,”Clinical and Experimental Obstetrics & Gynecology34, no. 3 (2007): 143–45; GrisJ.C.MercierE., and QuéréI., “Low-Molecular-Weight Heparin Versus Low-Dose Aspirin in Women with One Fetal Loss and a Constitutional Thrombophilic Disorder,”Blood103, no. 10 (2004): 3695–99; LaskinC.A.SpitzerK.A., and ClarkC.A., “Low Molecular Weight Heparin and Aspirin for Recurrent Pregnancy Loss: Results from the Randomized, Controlled HEPASA Trial,”Journal of Rheumatology36, no. 2 (2009): 279–87; RodgerM.A.KahnS. R., and CranneyA., “Long-Term Dalteparin in Pregnancy Not Associated with a Decrease in Bone Mineral Density: Substudy of a Randomized Controlled Trial,”Journal of Thrombosis and Haemostasis5, no. 8 (2007): 1600–06; VisserJ.UlanderV.M., and HelmerhorstF.M., “Thromboprophylaxis for Recurrent Miscarriage in Women with or without Thrombophilia,”Thrombosis and Haemostasis105, no. 2 (2011): 295–301.
87.
BauersachsR.M.DudenhausenJ., and FaridiA., “Risk Stratification and Heparin Prophylaxis to Prevent Venous Thromboembolism in Pregnant Women,”Thrombosis and Haemostasis98, no. 6 (2007): 1237–45; DargaudY.RugeriL., and VergnesM.C., “A Risk Score for the Management of Pregnant Women with Increased Risk of Venous Thromboembolism: A Multicentre Prospective Study,”British Journal of Haematology145, no. 6 (2009): 825–35.
88.
BatesS.M.GreerI.A., and PabingerI., “Venous Thromboembolism, Thrombophilia, Antithrombotic Therapy, and Pregnancy: American College of Chest Physicians Evidence-Based Clinical Practice Guidelines (8th Edition),”Chest133, no. 6, Supp. (2008): 844S–86S; DuhlA.J.PaidasM. J., and UralS.H., “Antithrombotic Therapy and Pregnancy: Consensus Report and Recommendations for Prevention and Treatment of Venous Thromboembolism and Adverse Pregnancy Outcomes,”American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology197, no. 5 (2007): 457.e1–57.e21; WeintraubA. and SheinerE., “Anticoagulant Therapy and Thromboprophylaxis in Patients with Thrombophilia,”Archives of Gynecology and Obstetrics276, no. 6 (2007): 567–71.
89.
Id.
90.
CoverdaleJ.H.McCulloughL.B., and ChervenakF.A., “The Ethics of Randomized Placebo-Controlled Trials of Anti-depressants with Pregnant Women: A Systematic Review,”Obstetrics & Gynecology112, no. 6 (2008): 1361–68.
91.
45 C.F.R. § 46.204 (2006).
92.
See Beagan and McDonald, supra note 33; McDonald and Cox, supra note 33.
93.
See Siroin, supra note 24.
94.
See DuBois, supra note 33. MustanskiB., “Ethical and Regulatory Issues with Conducting Sexuality Research with LGBT Adolescents: A Call to Action for a Scientifically Informed Approach,”Archives of Sexual Behavior40, no. 4 (2011): 673–86.
See <www.primr.org> (last visited December 10, 2012).
97.
See DuBois, 2009, supra note 35.
98.
45 C.F.R. § 46.107 (1999).
99.
See DeVries and Forsberg, supra note 10.
100.
See Sirotin, supra note 24.
101.
BeskowL.M.GradyC.IltisA.S.SadlerJ.Z., and WilfondB.S., “Points to Consider: The Research Ethics Consultation Service and the IRB,”IRB: Ethics & Human Research31, no. 6 (2009): 1–9.
102.
See DuBoisVolpe, and Rangel, supra note 33.
103.
Committee on Assessing the System for Protecting Human Research Subjects, Board on Health Sciences Policy, Institute of Medicine, Preserving Public Trust: Accreditation and Human Research Participant Protection Programs.Washington, DC, 2001; FedermanD.D.HannaK. E.RodriguezLyman L., Responsible Research: A Systems Approach to Protecting Research Participants.Washington, DC, 2002.
104.
See DuBoisVolpe, and Rangel, supra note 33.
105.
See Albanese, supra note 2; Robinson and Gehle, supra note 2.
See DuBoisHadley, and Bante, supra note 36; DunnCandilis, and Roberts, supra note 42.
110.
RidA. and WendlerD., “A Proposal and Prototype for a Research Risk Repository to Improve the Protection of Research Participants,”Clinical Trials8, no. 6 (2011): 705–15; See Abbott and Grady, supra note 15.
111.
See Pritchard, supra note 18.
112.
See Candilis, supra note 8.
113.
See Abbott and Grady, supra note 15.
114.
See Abbott and Grady, supra note 15.
115.
TaylorH.A., “Moving Beyond Compliance: Measuring Ethical Quality to Enhance the Oversight of Human Subjects Research,”IRB: Ethics and Human Research29, no. 5 (2007): 9–14; See Beagan and McDonald, supra note 33.