Do Current Federal Regulations Adequately Protect People who Participate in Medical Research?: Hearing Before the Subcommittee on Criminal Justice, Drug Policy, and Human Resources of the Committee on Government Reform, House of Representatives, One Hundred Sixth Congress, First Session, December 9, 1999
United States. Congress. House. Committee on Government Reform. Subcommittee on Criminal Justice, Drug Policy, and Human Resources
U.S. Government Printing Office, 2000 - Electronic government information - 144 pages
What people are saying - Write a review
We haven't found any reviews in the usual places.
Other editions - View all
additional adequate approved asked assurance behavior benefit called Chairman challenge changes clinical committee concerns condition conducted considered continuing December Department Director disabled disorders document drug effective Ellis ethical experimental experiments families Federal Federal regulations fenfluramine funded give groups Health hearing human research human subjects identify important increase independent individuals informed consent Institute interest involved issues Justice kind LAWRENCE mental MICA minimal risk minority move NYPI Office OPRR oversight parents participants patients persons Policy potential present problems procedures proposed protections protocol questions received recommendations record regulations Representatives research subjects Resources responsibilities result Review Board risk Secretary serve Services specific statement Steven Subcommittee testimony Thank there's things tion TOWNS treatment understanding vulnerable WALSH York
Page 17 - ... injury occurs and, if so, what they consist of, or where further information may be obtained 7. An explanation of whom to contact for answers to pertinent questions about the research and research subjects' rights, and whom to contact in the event of a research-related injury to the subject 8.
Page 16 - A statement that the study involves research, an explanation of the purposes of the research and the expected duration of the subject's participation, a description of the procedures to be followed, and identification of any procedures which are experimental...
Page 17 - A statement describing the extent, if any, to which confidentiality of records identifying the subject will be maintained; (6) For research involving more than minimal risk, an explanation as to whether any compensation and an explanation as to whether any medical treatments are available if injury occurs and, if so, what they consist of, or where further information may be obtained; (7) An explanation of whom to contact for answers to pertinent questions about the research and research subjects'...
Page 54 - IRB shall be sufficiently qualified through the experience and expertise of its members, and the diversity of the members, including consideration of race, gender, and cultural backgrounds and sensitivity to such issues as community attitudes, to promote respect for its advice and counsel in safeguarding the rights and welfare of human subjects.
Page 17 - ... (2) A description of any reasonably foreseeable risks or discomforts to the subject. (3) A description of any benefits to the subject or to others which may reasonably be expected from the research. (4) A disclosure of appropriate alternative procedures or courses of treatment, if any, that might be advantageous to the subject. (5) A statement describing the extent, if any, to which confidentiality of records identifying the subject will be maintained and that notes the possibility that the Food...
Page 134 - IRB finds that: a. the risk represents a minor increase over minimal risk; b. the intervention or procedure presents experiences to subjects that are reasonably commensurate with those inherent in their actual or expected medical, dental, psychological, social or educational situations; c. the intervention or procedure is likely to yield generalizable knowledge about the subjects...
Page 15 - When some or all of the subjects are likely to be vulnerable to coercion or undue influence, such as children, prisoners, pregnant women, mentally disabled persons, or economically or educationally disadvantaged persons, additional safeguards have been included in the study to protect the rights and welfare of these subjects.
Page 13 - Ideally, it is a local review, by individuals who are in the best position to know the resources of the institution, the capabilities and reputations of the investigators and staff, and the prevailing values and ethics of the community and likely subject population.
Page 13 - Board is, by federal regulation, to be established at the local level and has a minimum of five people, including at least one scientist, one nonscientist, and one person not otherwise affiliated with that institution. The nonscientist must be present to achieve a quorum.