The case against contract: Participant and investigator duty in clinical trials

American Journal of Bioethics

Volumn 11, Issue 4, 2011, Pages 16-18

  de Ville, Kenneth ^a  

^a EAST CAROLINA UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; CLINICAL TRIAL (TOPIC); CONTRACT; ETHICS; HUMAN; HUMAN RELATION; INFORMED CONSENT; LEGAL ASPECT; PATIENT; PERSONNEL; RESEARCH SUBJECT; SOCIAL BEHAVIOR;

CLINICAL TRIALS AS TOPIC; CONTRACTS; HUMANS; INFORMED CONSENT; PATIENT DROPOUTS; RESEARCH PERSONNEL; RESEARCH SUBJECTS; RESEARCHER-SUBJECT RELATIONS; SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY;

EID: 79953864188     PISSN: 15265161     EISSN: 15360075     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/15265161.2011.560349     Document Type: Article

References (7)

1. Blum, B. A. 2004. Contracts: Examples & explanations, 3rd ed. New York: Aspen.
2. Edwards, S. J. L. 2011. Assessing the remedy: The case for contracts in clinical trials. American Journal of Bioethics 11(4): 3-12.
3. Graveson, R. H. 1941. The movement from status to contract. Modern Law Review 4: 261-267.
4. Grimes v. Kennedy Krieger Institute, Inc., 72 A. 2d 807 (Md. 2001).
5. Hooker, W. (1849) 1972. Patient and physician: Or, A practical view of the mutual duties, relations and interests of the medical profession and the community. Facsimile reprint, New York: Arno Press.
6. Radin, M. J. 1996. Contested commodities. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
7. Sulmasy, D. P. 1993. What's so special about medicine? Theoretical Medicine 14: 27-42.