5 found
Order:
See also:
Profile: Susan Wallace
  1.  4
    Susan E. Wallace (2011). The Needle in the Haystack: International Consortia and the Return of Individual Research Results. Journal of Law, Medicine & Ethics 39 (4):631-639.
    Returning individual results to participants in research studies is gaining acceptance and policy guidance is now available for investigators to develop a plan for returning results at the local level. However, returning results discovered through the work of an international scientific research consortium presents additional ethical and procedural difficulties. No general guidance is available for international consortia that wish to consider this issue, but there are examples of internal policies that are being used by consortia such as the International Cancer (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1 citation  
  2. Stella Gonzalez Arnal, Donald Chalmers, David Kum-Wah Chan, Margaret Coffey, Jo Ann T. Croom, Mylène Deschênes, Henrich Ganthaler, Yuri Gariev, Ryuichi Ida, Jeffrey P. Kahn, Martin O. Makinde, Anna C. Mastroianni, Katharine R. Meacham, Bushra Mirza, Michael J. Morgan, Dianne Nicol, Edward Reichman, Susan E. Wallace & Larissa P. Zhiganova (2004). Cross-Cultural Biotechnology: A Reader. Rowman & Littlefield Publishers.
    This book is a rich blend of analyses by leading experts from various cultures and disciplines. A compact introduction to a complex field, it illustrates biotechnology's profound impact upon the environment and society. Moreover, it underscores the vital relevance of cultural values. This book empowers readers to more critically assess biotechnology's value and effectiveness within both specific cultural and global contexts.
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1 citation  
  3.  1
    Susan E. Wallace, Elli G. Gourna, Viktoriya Nikolova & Nuala A. Sheehan (2015). Family Tree and Ancestry Inference: Is There a Need for a ‘Generational’ Consent? BMC Medical Ethics 16 (1):1-9.
    BackgroundGenealogical research and ancestry testing are popular recreational activities but little is known about the impact of the use of these services on clients’ biological and social families. Ancestry databases are being enriched with self-reported data and data from deoxyribonucleic acid analyses, but also are being linked to other direct-to-consumer genetic testing and research databases. As both family history data and DNA can provide information on more than just the individual, we asked whether companies, as a part of the consent (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  4.  2
    Susan E. Wallace, Elli G. Gourna, Graeme Laurie, Osama Shoush & Jessica Wright (2016). Respecting Autonomy Over Time: Policy and Empirical Evidence on Re‐Consent in Longitudinal Biomedical Research. Bioethics 30 (3):210-217.
    Re-consent in research, the asking for a new consent if there is a change in protocol or to confirm the expectations of participants in case of change, is an under-explored issue. There is little clarity as to what changes should trigger re-consent and what impact a re-consent exercise has on participants and the research project. This article examines applicable policy statements and literature for the prevailing arguments for and against re-consent in relation to longitudinal cohort studies, tissue banks and biobanks. (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  5. Susan E. Wallace (2011). The Needle in the Haystack: International Consortia and the Return of Individual Research Results. Journal of Law, Medicine and Ethics 39 (4):631-639.
    No categories
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography