ArticleThe Journal of law, medicine & ethics : a journal of the American Society of Law, Medicine & Ethics2013
Are changes to the common rule necessary to address evolving areas of research? A case study focusing on the human microbiome project.
Article in The Journal of law, medicine & ethics : a journal of the American Society of Law, Medicine & Ethics, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Human Microbiome and Learning Healthcare Systems: Integrating Research and Precision Medicine for Inflammatory Bowel Disease.Omics : a journal of integrative biology · 2018Review
- Navigating social and ethical challenges of biobanking for human microbiome research.BMC medical ethics · 2017Article
- Canadian Research Ethics Board Leadership Attitudes to the Return of Genetic Research Results to Individuals and Their Families.The Journal of law, medicine & ethics : a journal of the American Society of Law, Medicine & Ethics · 2015Article
- An ethics safe harbor for international genomics research?Genome medicine · 2013Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
This article examines ways in which research conducted under the Human Microbiome Project, an effort to establish a "reference catalogue" of the micro-organisms present in the human body and determine how changes in those micro-organisms affect health and disease, raise challenging issues for regulation of human subject research. The article focuses on issues related to subject selection and recruitment, group stigma, and informational risks, and explores whether: (1) the Common Rule or proposed changes to the Rule adequately address these issues and (2) the Common Rule is the most appropriate vehicle to provide regulatory oversight and guidance on these topics.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.