This Article  • Full text  • PDF  • Send to a friend  • Save in My Folder  • Save to citation manager  • Permissions  Citing Articles  • Contact me when this article is cited  Related Content  • Similar articles in this journal  Topic Collections  • Journalology/ Peer Review/ Authorship  • Medical Practice  • Medical Ethics  • Patient Safety/ Medical Error  • Statistics and Research Methods  • Dermatology, Other  • Alert me on articles by topic  Social Bookmarking   What's this?

Jeffrey P. Callen, MD, Associate Editor; June K. Robinson, MD, Editor

Arch Dermatol. 2009;145(2):193-194.

	Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text and any section headings.

The conduct of human participant research and reporting the results of that research in medical journals relies upon the public trust of those who perform the research and publish the research to safeguard the safety and dignity of the individuals. Protection of the welfare, rights, and privacy of human subjects requires review and approval of the research plan by an institutional review board (IRB) or a human subjects committee (HSC). The investigator, who has a vested interest in the research, cannot decide what is exempt from review. An independent IRB or HSC offers protection for human participants and investigators. Human participants are defined as living individuals about whom an investigator conducting research obtains either data through intervention or interaction with the individual or identifiable private information.

The rules for conducting human participant research in the United States may vary . . . [Full Text of this Article]

DEFINITION OF RESEARCH


TYPES OF REVIEW BY HSC

US: REVIEW FOR ASSURANCE OF PRIVACY OF MEDICAL INFORMATION

STATING THE IRB DECISION

AUTHOR INFORMATION


CiteULike    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter     What's this?