-
- D T Chalkley.
- Am J Psychiatry. 1977 Aug 1; 134 (8): 911-3.
AbstractThe author discusses the evolution of federal constraints on medical, behavioral, and social science research. There has been only one court decision related to behavioral research and none in medical research. The burden of consent procedures can be lightened somewhat by careful consideration of the potential risks and nature of the research; questions are presented that can be used to determine whether constraints apply. The author notes that although there are good reasons for regulations in both behavioral and medical research, the appropriateness of current and proposed constraints is still a matter of debate.
Notes
Knowledge, pearl, summary or comment to share?You can also include formatting, links, images and footnotes in your notes
- Simple formatting can be added to notes, such as
*italics*
,_underline_
or**bold**
. - Superscript can be denoted by
<sup>text</sup>
and subscript<sub>text</sub>
. - Numbered or bulleted lists can be created using either numbered lines
1. 2. 3.
, hyphens-
or asterisks*
. - Links can be included with:
[my link to pubmed](http://pubmed.com)
- Images can be included with:
![alt text](https://bestmedicaljournal.com/study_graph.jpg "Image Title Text")
- For footnotes use
[^1](This is a footnote.)
inline. - Or use an inline reference
[^1]
to refer to a longer footnote elseweher in the document[^1]: This is a long footnote.
.