Reporting of ethical standards: Differences between complementary and orthodox medicine journals?

Wiener Klinische Wochenschrift

Volumn 116, Issue 14, 2004, Pages 500-503

  Lim, Byungmook ^a   Schmidt, Katja ^b   White, Adrian ^c   Ernst, Edzard ^b  

^a Korea Institute of Oriental Medicine (KIOM)   (South Korea)

^b PENINSULA MEDICAL SCHOOL   (United Kingdom)

^c British Medical Acupuncture Society   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Complementary medicine; Consent; Ethics; Guidelines; Reporting

Indexed keywords

ALTERNATIVE MEDICINE; ETHICS; INFORMED CONSENT; MEDICAL RESEARCH; MEDICAL SCHOOL; PUBLICATION; RESEARCH ETHICS; REVIEW; STANDARD;

EID: 4444289301     PISSN: 00435325     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/BF03040947     Document Type: Review

References (9)

1. The Helsinki Declaration (1999) Bull Med Eth, pp 16-17
2. http://www.doh.gov.uk/clinicalgovernance/pharmacy guidelines.pdf (accessed on the 03.05.02)
3. www.icmje.org/index.html (accessed on the 03.05.02)
4. Nahin RL, Straus SE (2001) Research into complementary and alternative medicine: problems and potential. BMJ 322: 161-164
5. House of Lords (2000) Science and technology - Sixth report. http://www.parliament.thestationeryoffice.co.ukpa/ ld199900/ldselect/ldsctech/ 123/12301.htm
6. http://bmj.com/advice/28.html (accessed on the 03.05.02)
7. Stelfox HT, Chua G, O'Rourke K, Detsky AS (1998) Conflict of interest in the debate over calcium-channel antagonists. N Engl J Med 338: 101-106
8. http://www.fda.gov/oc/advisory/conflictofinterest/guidance.html (accessed on the 23.12.03)
9. Doyal L, Tobias JS (eds) (2001) Informed consent in medical research. BMJ Books, London