The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Love Thy Neighbor: Replacing Paternalistic Protection as the Grounds for Research Ethics
Abstract
In a broad sense, I agree with the conclusions of the target article by Christine Grady and colleagues (2015), “Broad Consent for Research with Biological Samples: Workshop Conclusions.” Their reco...
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
In the citing paper
“(c) normative judgments must be grounded in, or at least reconciled with, foundational principles (21, 116, 120).”
From Lessons from HeLa Cells: The Ethics and Policy of Biospecimens (2016) · cites this paper as [116]
In the citing paper
“(b) attitudes and opinions may be expressions of intense moral reflection or the product of misunderstanding, bias, selfishness, self-deception, and other problematic factors (116, 120);”
From Lessons from HeLa Cells: The Ethics and Policy of Biospecimens (2016) · cites this paper as [116]
Citations
Cites
No references could be resolved yet.
Research works printed but not linked: 7
- 10.1093/0195159063.001.0001 · DOI
- Grady C., 2015, American Journal of Bioethics, 15, 34, 10.1080/15265161.2015.1062162 · DOI · Paper page
- Hobbes T, 1965, Leviathan
- Rawls J, 1993, Political liberalism
- 10.1080/15265161.2011.615588 · DOI
- Rhodes R., 2013, The human microbiome: Ethical, legal, and social concern
- 10.1136/medethics-2014-102284 · DOI
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Lessons from HeLa Cells: The Ethics and Policy of Biospecimens
Beskow, L. M. (2016) · Annual Review of Genomics and Human Genetics · doi:10.1146/annurev-genom-083115-022536 · Cited by 146
“Solutions to the identifiability problem that better support the interests of all stakeholders would focus not only on disclosing risks to prospective participants, but also on minimizing potential harms by ensuring the scientific merit of proposed studies (116) and prohibiting misuse of information (33, 121).”
Background
Metadata
- Authors
- Rhodes, R.
- Affiliations
- Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai (US)
- Corresponding author
- Rhodes, Rosamond
- ORCID
- Rhodes, Rosamond
- Venue
- The American Journal of Bioethics
- Publisher
- Informa UK Limited
- Published
- 2015-08-25
- Volume
- 15
- Issue
- 9
- Pages
- 49-51
- ISSN
- 1526-5161 (ISSN-L)
- 1536-0075
- OpenAlex
- W2102129126
- Cited by
- 3
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2019: 1 · 2016: 2
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- The American Journal of Bioethics (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Ethics in Clinical Research
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Ethics and bioethics in healthcare
- Health Sciences › Nursing › Issues, ethics and legal aspects › Biomedical Ethics and Regulation
- Keywords
- broad consent, biological specimen, research ethics, paternalism, research participant protection, informed consent
- MeSH terms
- Ethics, Humans, Love, Paternalism, Ethics, Research
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
