References
- Cho, M. K., D. Magnus, M. Constantine, et al. 2015. Attitudes toward risk and informed consent for research on medical practices: A cross-sectional survey. Annals of Internal Medicine 162(10): 690–696. doi: 10.7326/M15-0166.
- Kelley, M., C. James, S. Alessi Kraft, et al. 2015. Patient perspectives on the learning health system: the importance of trust and shared decision making. The American Journal of Bioethics 15(9): 4–17. doi: 10.1080/15265161.2015.1062163.
- Kim, S. Y., and F. G. Miller. 2016. Waivers and alterations to consent in pragmatic clinical trials: Respecting the principle of respect for persons. IRB: Ethics and Human Research 38(1): 1–5.
- Kraft, S. A., K. M. Porter, D. M. Korngiebel, et al. 2017a. Research on medical practices: Willingness to participate and the investigational misconception. IRB: Ethics and Human Research 39(4): 10–16. doi: 10.1080/15265161.2017.1328535.
- Kraft, S. A., K. M. Porter, S. K. Shah, and B. S. Wilfond. 2017b. Comprehension and choice under the revised common rule: Improving informed consent by offering reasons why some enroll in research and others do not. The American Journal of Bioethics 17(7): 53–55.
- Morain, S. R., S. Joffe, and E. A. Largent. 2019. When is it ethical for physician-investigators to seek consent from their own patients? American Journal of Bioethics 19(4): 11–18.
- National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2017. Dual use research of concern in the life sciences: Current issues and controversies. Washington, DC: National Academies Press (US).
- Shah, A., K. Porter, S. Juul, and B. S. Wilfond. 2015. Precluding consent by clinicians who are both the attending and the investigator: an outdated shibboleth? The American Journal of Bioethics 15(4): 80–82. doi: 10.1080/15265161.2015.1011007.