Consent in escrow: opting to opt in

In this paper, we reply to Taylor's (2015) peer commentary on consent-in-escrow. Specifically, we clarify the utility of this novel approach, the way in which it minimizes risks to participants, and how it differs from existing opt-out methods. We further explore its potential use in fields bey...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Van der Loos, Kiah I., Longstaff, Holly, Virani, Alice, Illes, Judy
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Oxford University Press 2015
Materias:
Response to Peer Commentary
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5034402/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27774229
http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/jlb/lsv036
_version_ 1782455261326213120
author Van der Loos, Kiah I.
Longstaff, Holly
Virani, Alice
Illes, Judy
author_facet Van der Loos, Kiah I.
Longstaff, Holly
Virani, Alice
Illes, Judy
author_sort Van der Loos, Kiah I.
collection PubMed
description In this paper, we reply to Taylor's (2015) peer commentary on consent-in-escrow. Specifically, we clarify the utility of this novel approach, the way in which it minimizes risks to participants, and how it differs from existing opt-out methods. We further explore its potential use in fields beyond disaster research.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5034402
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2015
publisher Oxford University Press
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-50344022016-10-21 Consent in escrow: opting to opt in Van der Loos, Kiah I. Longstaff, Holly Virani, Alice Illes, Judy J Law Biosci Response to Peer Commentary In this paper, we reply to Taylor's (2015) peer commentary on consent-in-escrow. Specifically, we clarify the utility of this novel approach, the way in which it minimizes risks to participants, and how it differs from existing opt-out methods. We further explore its potential use in fields beyond disaster research. Oxford University Press 2015-09-09 /pmc/articles/PMC5034402/ /pubmed/27774229 http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/jlb/lsv036 Text en © The Author 2015. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of Duke University School of Law, Harvard Law School, Oxford University Press, and Stanford Law School. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs licence (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/), which permits non-commercial reproduction and distribution of the work, in any medium, provided the original work is not altered or transformed in any way, and that the work is properly cited. For commercial re-use, please contact journals.permissions@oup.com
spellingShingle Response to Peer Commentary
Van der Loos, Kiah I.
Longstaff, Holly
Virani, Alice
Illes, Judy
Consent in escrow: opting to opt in
title Consent in escrow: opting to opt in
title_full Consent in escrow: opting to opt in
title_fullStr Consent in escrow: opting to opt in
title_full_unstemmed Consent in escrow: opting to opt in
title_short Consent in escrow: opting to opt in
title_sort consent in escrow: opting to opt in
topic Response to Peer Commentary
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5034402/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27774229
http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/jlb/lsv036
work_keys_str_mv AT vanderlooskiahi consentinescrowoptingtooptin
AT longstaffholly consentinescrowoptingtooptin
AT viranialice consentinescrowoptingtooptin
AT illesjudy consentinescrowoptingtooptin

Ejemplares similares