Publication
Published on: October 22, 2022
Published in: Contemporary Clinical Trials

Published on: December 7, 2022
Published in: Journal of Empirical Research on Human Research Ethics
Published recently in the Journal of Empirical Research on Human Research Ethics, Luke Gelinas, David Strauss, Hayat Ahmed, Barbara Bierer, and others co-authored an article entitled, “Protecting the Vulnerable and Including the Under-Represented: IRB Practices and Attitudes.” A pilot national survey of IRB Chairs was conducted to assess attitudes and practices with regard to protecting the vulnerable and including under-represented groups in research.
Released on: April 6, 2017
Published in: Journal of Medical Ethics
Ensuring that clinical trials, once launched, successfully complete and generate useful knowledge is an important and indeed ethically imperative goal, given the risks and burdens borne by research participants. Since there are insufficient willing research participants to power all the trials that are currently undertaken,1 addressing underenrolment will require prioritisation decisions that reduce the number of trials competing for participants. While there are multiple levels at which research priority-setting can and does take place, competition between trials often plays out in real time at the institutional or site level, where complex decisions must be made about how to manage overlapping trials in ways that balance different considerations, including the risk of non-completion. We sought to explore what research institutions in particular might ethically do to mitigate the risk that competition between trials will contribute to recruitment shortfalls.
Published on: May 13, 2016
Published in: Therapeutic Innovation & Regulatory Science
Accepted manuscript is available here.
Published on: January 26, 2017
Published in: Bloomberg BNA Life Sciences Law & Industry Report
Published on: May 18, 2018
Published in: Pediatric Research