Federal regulations governing human subjects research do not address key questions raised by incidental neuroimaging findings, including the scope of a researcher's disclosure with respect to the possibility of incidental findings and the question whether a researcher has an affirmative legal cuty to seek, detect, and report incidental findings. The scope of researcher duties may, however, be mapped with reference to common law doctrine, including fiduciary, tort, contract, and bailment theories of liability. © Taylor & Francis Group, LLC.
CITATION STYLE
Tovino, S. A. (2008). Incidental findings: A common law approach. Accountability in Research, 15(4), 242–261. https://doi.org/10.1080/08989620802388705
Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.