Order:
  1. Conflicts among Multinational Ethical and Scientific Standards for Clinical Trials of Therapeutic Interventions.Jacob M. Kolman, Nelda P. Wray, Carol M. Ashton, Danielle M. Wenner, Anna F. Jarman & Baruch A. Brody - 2012 - Journal of Law, Medicine and Ethics 40 (1):99-121.
    There has been a growing concern over establishing norms that ensure the ethically acceptable and scientifically sound conduct of clinical trials. Among the leading norms internationally are the World Medical Association's Declaration of Helsinki, guidelines by the Council for International Organizations of Medical Sciences, the International Conference on Harmonization's standards for industry, and the CONSORT group's reporting norms, in addition to the influential U.S. Federal Common Rule, Food and Drug Administration's body of regulations, and information sheets by the Department of (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  2. A methodology for teaching ethics in the clinical setting: A clinical handbook for medical ethics.Laurence B. McCullough & Carol M. Ashton - 1994 - Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics 15 (1).
    The pluralism of methodologies and severe time constraints pose important challenges to pedagogy in clinical ethics. We designed a step-by-step student handbook to operate within such constraints and to respect the methodological pluralism of bioethics and clinical ethics. The handbook comprises six steps: Step 1: What are the facts of the case?; Step 2: What are your obligations to your patient?; Step 3: What are your obligations to third parties to your relationship with the patient?; Step 4: Do your obligations (...)
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   3 citations  
  3.  10
    Are Surgical Trials with Negative Results Being Interpreted Correctly?Baruch A. Brody, Carol M. Ashton, Dandan Liu, Youxin Xiong, Xuan Yao & Nelda P. Wray - unknown
    BACKGROUND: Many published accounts of clinical trials report no differences between the treatment arms, while being underpowered to find differences. This study determined how the authors of these reports interpreted their findings. STUDY DESIGN: We examined 54 reports of surgical trials chosen randomly from a database of 110 influential trials conducted in 2008. Seven that reported having adequate statistical power were excluded from further analysis, as were the 32 that reported significant differences between the treatment arms. We examined the remaining (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark