Ethical Issues in Cardiovascular Behavioral Medicine Research
Handbook of Cardiovascular Behavioral Medicine, Page: 1511-1527
2022
- 1Captures
Metric Options: CountsSelecting the 1-year or 3-year option will change the metrics count to percentiles, illustrating how an article or review compares to other articles or reviews within the selected time period in the same journal. Selecting the 1-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year. Selecting the 3-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year plus the two years prior.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Metrics Details
- Captures1
- Readers1
Book Chapter Description
Biomedical researchers are faced with increasing institutional, state, and federal regulatory requirements. New and established investigators who are attempting to translate their findings into clinical research are often ill-prepared to navigate the regulatory maze. In this chapter, we use a case-based approach to review some of the current “hot topic” areas in the regulatory oversight of research. These hot topics include (1) unanticipated problems involving risks to subjects or others, (2) incidental findings encountered during research studies, (3) enrollment of students as research subjects, and (4) research in decisionally impaired subjects. New technologies and the ever-growing entrepreneurship of research will continue to bring new challenges for the ethical conduct of research.
Bibliographic Details
http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?partnerID=HzOxMe3b&scp=85153638879&origin=inward; http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-85960-6_63; https://link.springer.com/10.1007/978-0-387-85960-6_63; https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-85960-6_63; https://link.springer.com/referenceworkentry/10.1007/978-0-387-85960-6_63
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Provide Feedback
Have ideas for a new metric? Would you like to see something else here?Let us know