Journal of Law, Medicine and Ethics 43 (3):502-513 (2015)

Abstract
We surveyed IRB chairs' perspectives on offering individual genetic research results to participants and families, including family members of deceased participants, and the IRB's role in addressing these issues. Given a particular hypothetical scenario, respondents favored offering results to participants but not family members, giving choices at the time of initial consent, and honoring elicited choices. They felt IRBs should have authority regarding the process issues, but a more limited role in medical and scientific issues
Keywords No keywords specified (fix it)
Categories (categorize this paper)
DOI 10.1111/jlme.12292
Options
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

PhilArchive copy


Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy     Papers currently archived: 68,975
External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
Through your library

References found in this work BETA

View all 9 references / Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

Add more citations

Similar books and articles

Familial Communication of Research Results: A Need to Know?Lee Black & Kelly A. McClellan - 2011 - Journal of Law, Medicine and Ethics 39 (4):605-613.
The Return of Results of Deceased Research Participants.Anne Marie Tassé - 2011 - Journal of Law, Medicine and Ethics 39 (4):621-630.
Understanding Incidental Findings in the Context of Genetics and Genomics.Mildred K. Cho - 2008 - Journal of Law, Medicine and Ethics 36 (2):280-285.

Analytics

Added to PP index
2015-10-20

Total views
9 ( #946,771 of 2,498,175 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
1 ( #427,476 of 2,498,175 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads

My notes