Pular para o conteúdo principal

ETHNOS_APP

Início • Busca • Periódicos • Lista 0

Barbara E Bierer

Dados Biográficos

ID1741606
NOMEBarbara E Bierer
PRENOMESBarbara E
SOBRENOMEBierer
ASSINATURABIERER B E
AFILIAÇÕESBrigham and Women's Hospital
ORCID0000-0001-6448-8170
VERIFICADOSim
TOTAL DE OBRAS9
TOTAL DE CITAÇÕES4
TOTAL COMO AUTOR9
TOTAL COMO EDITOR0
PRIMEIRO ANO DE PUBLICAÇÃO2014
ANO MAIS RECENTE DE PUBLICAÇÃO2025
ÍNDICE H1
  • An Analysis of Institutional Review Board Policies for Enrollment of Adults with Impaired or Uncertain Decision-Making Capacity

    Open Access•Emily Nguyen, David Appiah et al.•ARTICLE•Journal of Empirical Research on…•2025•Referências: 1

    Background: Unwarranted exclusion of people with uncertain or impaired decision-making capacity from participation in research violates principles of justice and fairness and adversely impacts the health and welfare of these populations. Methods: We conducted a cross-sectional study of institutional review board (IRB) policies for investigators and IRB members at 94 top-funded U.S. research institutions to better understand the guidance they prov…

  • Communicating complex numeric information in clinical research

    Open Access•Barbara E Bierer, Sylvia Baedorf Kassis•ARTICLE•Frontiers in Communication•2023

    The ability to understand and use numeric information in healthcare and clinical research is a critical component of informed decision-making for patients and study participants. Health numeracy levels in the general population, however, tend to be quite low and as such, the responsibility falls on communicators to ensure that the information being shared is designed to facilitate recipient comprehension and support their autonomy. Here, we intro…

  • Engaging key stakeholders to overcome barriers to studying the quality of research ethics oversight

    Open Access•Emily E Anderson, Elisa A Hurley et al.•ARTICLE•Research Ethics•2023

    The primary purpose of Institutional Review Boards (IRBs) is to protect the rights and welfare of human research participants. Evaluation and measurement of how IRBs satisfy this purpose and other important goals are open questions that demand empirical research. Research on IRBs, and the Human Research Protection Programs (HRPPs) of which they are often a part, is necessary to inform evidence-based practices, policies, and approaches to quality …

  • Data sharing in the context of community-engaged research partnerships

    Open Access•Karen M Emmons, Samuel R Mendez et al.•ARTICLE•Social Science & Medicine•2023•Citada por: 1•Referências: 27

    Over the past 20 years, the National Institutes for Health (NIH) has implemented several policies designed to improve sharing of research data, such as the NIH public access policy for publications, NIH genomic data sharing policy, and National Cancer Institute (NCI) Cancer Moonshot public access and data sharing policy. In January 2023, a new NIH data sharing policy has gone into effect, requiring researchers to submit a Data Management and Shar…

  • Allocation of Opportunities to Participate in Clinical Trials during the Covid‐19 Pandemic and Other Public Health Emergencies

    Open Access•Kayte Spector‐Bagdady, Holly Fernandez Lynch et al.•ARTICLE•The Hastings Center Report•2022

    Covid‐19 raised many novel ethical issues including regarding the allocation of opportunities to participate in clinical trials during a public health emergency. In this article, we explore how hospitals that have a scarcity of trial opportunities, either overall or in a specific trial, can equitably allocate those opportunities in the context of an urgent medical need with limited therapeutic interventions. We assess the three main approaches to…

  • Protecting the Vulnerable and Including the Under-Represented

    Open Access•Luke Gelinas, David H Strauss et al.•ARTICLE•Journal of Empirical Research on…•2022•Citada por: 3•Referências: 2

    Since their inception, Institutional Review Boards (IRBs) have been charged with protecting the vulnerable in research. More recently, attention has turned to whether IRBs also have a role to play in ensuring representative study samples and promoting the inclusion of historically under-represented groups. These two aims-protecting the vulnerable and including the under-represented-can pull in different directions, given the potential for overlap…

  • Using Social Media as a Research Recruitment Tool

    Luke Gelinas, Robin Pierce et al.•ARTICLE•The American Journal of Bioethics•2017

    The use of social media as a recruitment tool for research with humans is increasing, and likely to continue to grow. Despite this, to date there has been no specific regulatory guidance and there has been little in the bioethics literature to guide investigators and institutional review boards (IRBs) faced with navigating the ethical issues such use raises. We begin to fill this gap by first defending a nonexceptionalist methodology for assessin…

  • Confronting Biospecimen Exceptionalism in Proposed Revisions to the Common Rule

    Open Access•Holly Fernandez Lynch, Barbara E Bierer et al.•ARTICLE•The Hastings Center Report•2016

    On September 8, 2015, the Department of Health and Human Services issued a Notice of Proposed Rule Making to revise the Federal Policy for the Protection of Human Subjects, widely known as the “Common Rule.” The NPRM proposes several changes to the current system, including a dramatic shift in the approach to secondary research using biospecimens and data. Under the current rules, it is relatively easy to use biospecimens and data for secondary r…

  • Research Misconduct Involving Noncompliance in Human Subjects Research Supported by the Public Health Service

    Open Access•Barbara E Bierer, Mark Barnes•ARTICLE•The Hastings Center Report•2014

    Over the past three decades, two separate federal regulatory structures have emerged, each seeking to assure separate aspects of the integrity and ethics of research conducted using federal funding. One set of regulations is described in the Public Health Service Policies on Research Misconduct and relates to research misconduct, defined as consisting of fabrication of data or results, falsification of data and results, or plagiarism, in accordan…

  • Protecting the Vulnerable and Including the Under-Represented

    Open Access•Luke Gelinas, David H Strauss et al.•ARTICLE•Journal of Empirical Research on…•2022•Citada por: 3•Referências: 2

    Since their inception, Institutional Review Boards (IRBs) have been charged with protecting the vulnerable in research. More recently, attention has turned to whether IRBs also have a role to play in ensuring representative study samples and promoting the inclusion of historically under-represented groups. These two aims-protecting the vulnerable and including the under-represented-can pull in different directions, given the potential for overlap…

  • Data sharing in the context of community-engaged research partnerships

    Open Access•Karen M Emmons, Samuel R Mendez et al.•ARTICLE•Social Science & Medicine•2023•Citada por: 1•Referências: 27

    Over the past 20 years, the National Institutes for Health (NIH) has implemented several policies designed to improve sharing of research data, such as the NIH public access policy for publications, NIH genomic data sharing policy, and National Cancer Institute (NCI) Cancer Moonshot public access and data sharing policy. In January 2023, a new NIH data sharing policy has gone into effect, requiring researchers to submit a Data Management and Shar…

  • Research Misconduct Involving Noncompliance in Human Subjects Research Supported by the Public Health Service

    Open Access•Barbara E Bierer, Mark Barnes•ARTICLE•The Hastings Center Report•2014

    Over the past three decades, two separate federal regulatory structures have emerged, each seeking to assure separate aspects of the integrity and ethics of research conducted using federal funding. One set of regulations is described in the Public Health Service Policies on Research Misconduct and relates to research misconduct, defined as consisting of fabrication of data or results, falsification of data and results, or plagiarism, in accordan…

  • Confronting Biospecimen Exceptionalism in Proposed Revisions to the Common Rule

    Open Access•Holly Fernandez Lynch, Barbara E Bierer et al.•ARTICLE•The Hastings Center Report•2016

    On September 8, 2015, the Department of Health and Human Services issued a Notice of Proposed Rule Making to revise the Federal Policy for the Protection of Human Subjects, widely known as the “Common Rule.” The NPRM proposes several changes to the current system, including a dramatic shift in the approach to secondary research using biospecimens and data. Under the current rules, it is relatively easy to use biospecimens and data for secondary r…

  • Using Social Media as a Research Recruitment Tool

    Luke Gelinas, Robin Pierce et al.•ARTICLE•The American Journal of Bioethics•2017

    The use of social media as a recruitment tool for research with humans is increasing, and likely to continue to grow. Despite this, to date there has been no specific regulatory guidance and there has been little in the bioethics literature to guide investigators and institutional review boards (IRBs) faced with navigating the ethical issues such use raises. We begin to fill this gap by first defending a nonexceptionalist methodology for assessin…

  • Allocation of Opportunities to Participate in Clinical Trials during the Covid‐19 Pandemic and Other Public Health Emergencies

    Open Access•Kayte Spector‐Bagdady, Holly Fernandez Lynch et al.•ARTICLE•The Hastings Center Report•2022

    Covid‐19 raised many novel ethical issues including regarding the allocation of opportunities to participate in clinical trials during a public health emergency. In this article, we explore how hospitals that have a scarcity of trial opportunities, either overall or in a specific trial, can equitably allocate those opportunities in the context of an urgent medical need with limited therapeutic interventions. We assess the three main approaches to…

  • Protecting the Vulnerable and Including the Under-Represented

    Open Access•Luke Gelinas, David H Strauss et al.•ARTICLE•Journal of Empirical Research on…•2022•Citada por: 3•Referências: 2

    Since their inception, Institutional Review Boards (IRBs) have been charged with protecting the vulnerable in research. More recently, attention has turned to whether IRBs also have a role to play in ensuring representative study samples and promoting the inclusion of historically under-represented groups. These two aims-protecting the vulnerable and including the under-represented-can pull in different directions, given the potential for overlap…

  • Communicating complex numeric information in clinical research

    Open Access•Barbara E Bierer, Sylvia Baedorf Kassis•ARTICLE•Frontiers in Communication•2023

    The ability to understand and use numeric information in healthcare and clinical research is a critical component of informed decision-making for patients and study participants. Health numeracy levels in the general population, however, tend to be quite low and as such, the responsibility falls on communicators to ensure that the information being shared is designed to facilitate recipient comprehension and support their autonomy. Here, we intro…

  • Engaging key stakeholders to overcome barriers to studying the quality of research ethics oversight

    Open Access•Emily E Anderson, Elisa A Hurley et al.•ARTICLE•Research Ethics•2023

    The primary purpose of Institutional Review Boards (IRBs) is to protect the rights and welfare of human research participants. Evaluation and measurement of how IRBs satisfy this purpose and other important goals are open questions that demand empirical research. Research on IRBs, and the Human Research Protection Programs (HRPPs) of which they are often a part, is necessary to inform evidence-based practices, policies, and approaches to quality …

  • Data sharing in the context of community-engaged research partnerships

    Open Access•Karen M Emmons, Samuel R Mendez et al.•ARTICLE•Social Science & Medicine•2023•Citada por: 1•Referências: 27

    Over the past 20 years, the National Institutes for Health (NIH) has implemented several policies designed to improve sharing of research data, such as the NIH public access policy for publications, NIH genomic data sharing policy, and National Cancer Institute (NCI) Cancer Moonshot public access and data sharing policy. In January 2023, a new NIH data sharing policy has gone into effect, requiring researchers to submit a Data Management and Shar…

  • An Analysis of Institutional Review Board Policies for Enrollment of Adults with Impaired or Uncertain Decision-Making Capacity

    Open Access•Emily Nguyen, David Appiah et al.•ARTICLE•Journal of Empirical Research on…•2025•Referências: 1

    Background: Unwarranted exclusion of people with uncertain or impaired decision-making capacity from participation in research violates principles of justice and fairness and adversely impacts the health and welfare of these populations. Methods: We conducted a cross-sectional study of institutional review board (IRB) policies for investigators and IRB members at 94 top-funded U.S. research institutions to better understand the guidance they prov…

Political science (8 obras) · Ethics in Clinical Research (7 obras) · Psychology (7 obras) · Business (6 obras) · Medicine (6 obras) · Public relations (6 obras) · Computer Science (4 obras) · Law (4 obras) · Engineering (3 obras) · Engineering ethics (3 obras)

Ethnos_APP • Projeto Open Source • Licença MIT • Frontend v2.0.0 • Privacidade e Cookies • Documentação da API: api.ethnos.app/docs • Código da API: GitHub • DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.17049435 • Código do Frontend: GitHub • DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.17050053 • cruz.rio.br • Expectantes Misericordiae