van DeldenJJvan der GraafR.Revised CIOMS International Ethical Guidelines for Health-Related Research Involving Humans. JAMA. 2017;317:135-136.
2.
Protection of human subjects; Belmont Report: notice of report for public comment. Fed Regist. 1979;44:23191-23197.
3.
HofmannB.Broadening consent—and diluting ethics?J Med Ethics. 2009;35:125-129.
4.
SteinsbekkKSKare MyskjaBSolbergB.Broad consent versus dynamic consent in biobank research: is passive participation an ethical problem?Eur J Hum Genet. 2013;21:897-902.
Department of Homeland Security, Department of Agriculture, Department of Energy, et al. Federal policy for the protection of human subjects. Fed Regist. 2017;82:7149-7274.
8.
JagsiRGriffithKASabolchAet al. Perspectives of patients with cancer on the ethics of rapid-learning health systems. J Clin Oncol. 2017;35:2315-2323.
9.
De VriesRGTomlinsonTMyra KimHet al. The moral concerns of biobank donors: the effect of non-welfare interests on willingness to donate. Life Sci Soc Policy. 2016;12:3.
10.
Spector-BagdadyKDe VriesRGGornickMet al. Encouraging participation and transparency in biobank research: disclosure of commercialization and benefit-sharing opportunities. Department of Health and Human Services: Data Privacy in the Digital Age (October 26, 2017). https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hayKGOjG-TA. Accessed February 27, 2018.
11.
SmithJDBirkelandACGoldmanEBet al. Immortal life of the Common Rule: ethics, consent, and the future of cancer research. J Clin Oncol. 2017;35:1879-1883.
12.
LynchHFMeyerMN.Regulating research with biospecimens under the revised Common Rule. Hastings Cntr Rep. 2017;47:3-4.
13.
JonesRDSabolchANAakhusEet al. Patient perspectives on the ethical implementation of a rapid learning system for oncology care. J Oncol Pract. 2017;13:e163-e174.
