Dies ist eine Übersichtsseite mit Metadaten zu dieser wissenschaftlichen Arbeit. Der vollständige Artikel ist beim Verlag verfügbar.
‘Ethical responsibility’ or ‘a whole can of worms’: differences in opinion on incidental finding review and disclosure in neuroimaging research from focus group discussions with participants, parents, IRB members, investigators, physicians and community members
23
Zitationen
6
Autoren
2015
Jahr
Abstract
Understanding the perceived impact on all stakeholders involved in the process of disclosing incidental findings is necessary to determine appropriate research management policy. Our data further demonstrate the challenge of this task as different stakeholders evaluate the balance between risk and benefit related to their unique positions in this process. These findings offer some of the first qualitative insight into the expectations of the diverse stakeholders affected by incidental finding disclosure.
Ähnliche Arbeiten
World Medical Association Declaration of Helsinki: Ethical Principles for Medical Research Involving Human Subjects
2003 · 10.822 Zit.
SPIRIT 2013 explanation and elaboration: guidance for protocols of clinical trials
2013 · 6.993 Zit.
Empirical evidence of bias. Dimensions of methodological quality associated with estimates of treatment effects in controlled trials
1995 · 5.585 Zit.
The ARRIVE guidelines 2.0: Updated guidelines for reporting animal research
2020 · 5.386 Zit.
The global landscape of AI ethics guidelines
2019 · 4.717 Zit.