Conflict of Interest and Institutional Review Boards

Food and Drug Administration. Code of Federal Regulations. 1981;title 21; CFR part 50.

Department of Health and Human Services. Code of federal regu-lations. 1983;title 45;CFR part 46.

Levine R. Ethics and regulation of clinical research. 2nd ed. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1986.

Rodwin M. Money, medicine and morals: physicians’ conflicts of interest. New York: Oxford University Press, 1993.

McNeill P. The ethics and politics of human experimentation. Melbourne: Cambridge University Press, 1993.

Advisory Committee on Human Radiation Experiments. Final report of the Advisory Committee on Human Radiation Experiments. Washington DC: Human Radiation Interagency Working Group, 1995.

Rennie D. Breast cancer: how to handle misconduct. JAMA 1994;271:1205–7.

Hilts P. House panel told of more tests done without consent. The New York Times 1994 May 24;Sect A:13.

US General Accounting Office. Scientific research. Continued vigilance critical to protecting human subjects. Washington DC: GAO Health, Education and Human Services Division, 1996 March. Report No.: B259279.

Beauchamp T. Ethical issues in funding and monitoring universi-ty research. Business & Professional Ethics Journal 1992;11:5–16.

Thompson D. Understanding financial conflicts of interest. N Engl J Med 1993;329:573–6.

Morreim E. Conflict of interest. In: Reich W , ed. Encyclopedia of bioethics, vol 1. New York: Simon & Schuster MacMillan, 1995.

American College of Physicians Ethics Committee. American College of Physicians ethics manual. Ann Intern Med 1992;117:947–60.

American Federation for Clinical Research. American Federation for Clinical Research guidelines for avoiding conflict of interest. Clin Res 1990;38:239–40.

Association of American Medical Colleges. Guidelines for deal-ing with faculty conflicts of commitment and conflicts of interest in research. Acad Med 1990;65:489–96.

Porter R , Malone T , Vaughan C , eds. Biomedical research: col-laboration and conflict of interest. Baltimore: John Hopkins University Press, 1992.

Jones J. Bad blood: the Tuskegee syphilis experiment. New York: Free Press, 1981.

Rothman D. Were Tuskegee and Willowbrook “studies in nature?” Hastings Center Report 1982;12:5–7.

Angell M. Editorial responsibility: protecting human rights by restricting publication of unethical research. In: Annas G , Grodin M , eds. The Nazi doctors and the Nuremberg Code. Human rights in human experimentation. New York: Oxford University Press, 1992:276–85.

Blumenthal D. Growing pains for new academic/industry rela-tionships. Health Aff 1994;Summer: 176–93.

Heath E. The IRB's monitoring function: four concepts of moni-toring. IRB 1979;1:1–3,12.

Caplan A. Random auditing a modest proposal for reforming the regulation of research. Clin Res 1983;31:142–3.

Christakis N. Should IRBs monitor research more strictly? IRB 1988;10:8–10.

Barber B , Lally J , Makarushka J , Sullivan D. Research on human subjects: problems of social control in medical experimentation. New Brunswick: Transaction Books, 1973.

Gray B , Cooke R , Tannenbaum A. Research involving human subjects. Science 1978;201:1094–1101.

Sackoff-Lampert S. Institutional review boards: a sociological inquiry-protection for whom? [doctoral thesis]. UCSF, 1984.

Veatch R. Human experimentation committees: professional or representative? Hastings Center Report 1975;5:31–40.

Williams P. Success in spite of failure: why IRBs falter in reviewing risks and benefits. IRB 1984;6:1–4.

World Medical Association. Declaration of Helsinki. In: Reich W , ed. Encyclopedia of bioethics, vol 5. New York: Simon & Shuster Macmillan, 1989:2765–7.

Gray B. An assessment of institutional review committees in human experimentation. Med Care 1975;13:318–28.

Annas G. Judging medicine. Clifton, NJ: Humana Press, 1988.

Katz J. Ethics and clinical research revisited: a tribute to Henry K Beecher. Hastings Center Report 1993;23:31–39.

Hayes G , Hayes S , Dykstra T. Characteristics of institutional review boards and their potential effects on decision making. American Public Health Association Annual Meeting. San Francisco, 1993.

Fox R , Swazey J. Spare Parts. Organ replacement in American Society. New York: Oxford University Press, 1992.

Sheldon R. The IRB's responsibility to itself. Hastings Center Report 1985;15:11–2.

Levine C , Caplan A. Beyond localism: a proposal for a national research review board. IRB 1986;8:7–9.

Sheretz R , Streed S. Medical devices: significant risk vs non-significant risk. JAMA 1994;272:955–6.

Meyers K. Is local review being circumvented? IRB 1982;4:6.

Food and Drug Administration. Warning letters Oct. 1993 Mar 1994.

Federal Register, Part II. Federal policy for the protection of human subjects; notices and rules, vol 56. Washington, DC: 1991:28002–32.

Holm S. How many lay members can you have in your IRB? An overview of the Danish system. IRB 1992;14:8–11.

Edgar H , Rothman D. The institutional review board and beyond: future challenges to the ethics of human experimentation. Milbank Q 1995;73:489–506.

Rodwin M. Physicians’ conflicts of interest. The limitations of disclosure. New Engl J Med 1989;321:1405–7.

US Deptartment of Health and Human Services and National Science Foundation. Objectivity in research; investigatory financial disclosure policy; final rule and notice. Washington DC: Federal Register, 1995.