<?xml version="1.0" encoding="iso-8859-1"?>
<!-- generator="FeedCreator 1.7.2" -->
<rss version="2.0">
    <channel>
        <title>MedWorm Tags: investigators:</title>
        <description>MedWorm provides a medical RSS filtering service. Over 6000 RSS medical sources are combined and output via different filters. This feed contains the latest medical blog items that have been tagged with 'investigators:'.</description>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.medworm.com/rss/search.php?qu=%22investigators%3A%22&t=%22investigators%3A%22&r=Exact&o=d&f=tag]]></link>
        <lastBuildDate>Wed, 21 Jul 2010 11:17:57 +0100</lastBuildDate>
        <item>
            <title>Where Have All The Clinical Investigators Gone?</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3666227&amp;cid=t_355750_150_f&amp;fid=35777&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FPharmalot%2F%7E3%2FRGDjRXl_eDU%2F</link>
            <description>Between 2004 and 2007, the number of clinical trial investigators who are regulated by the FDA fell 5.2 percent in the US and 6.1 percent in Europe, while increasing 16 percent in Eastern Europe, 12 percent in Asia and 10 percent in Latin America, according to a new survey from the Association of Clinical Research Organizations.
Why are investigators in the US and Western Europe dropping out? We know that pharma can runs trials more cheaply overseas. But what do investigators say? Well, 70 percent of respondents believe current regulations make trials difficult to manage. They cited such issues as medical liability (42 percent in the US vs. 20 percent in Western Europe), conflict of interest rules and mandates that docs disclose financial relationships with pharma. File this under backlash...</description>
            <author>Pharmalot</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3666227</comments>
            <pubDate>Tue, 15 Jun 2010 17:50:05 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3666227</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>FDA Guidance For Disqualifying Trial Investigators</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3625773&amp;cid=t_355750_150_f&amp;fid=35777&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FPharmalot%2F%7E3%2Fs5ATp06PrMM%2F</link>
            <description>As part of its get-tough posture on patient safety and industry conduct, the FDA has issued a new guidance for disqualifying clinical trial investigators. The 10-page document, which the agency notes does not establish a &amp;#8220;legally enforceable&amp;#8221; set of responsbiliites, nonetheless, spells out the possible consequences for messing with a clinical trial.
Basically, this reads like the primer it&amp;#8217;s intended to be on agency thinking. Take a look to learn about disqualification proceedings, consent agreements and even the possibility of criminal prosecutions. Who should read this? Lots of folks - drugmakers, doctors and, of course, institutional review boards, which will likely have their hands full understanding regulations (see this). (Source: Pharmalot)</description>
            <author>Pharmalot</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3625773</comments>
            <pubDate>Thu, 03 Jun 2010 13:23:14 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3625773</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>On Being a Student Therapist: Week Four</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3331349&amp;cid=t_355750_109_f&amp;fid=34750&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fpsychcentral.com%2Fblog%2Farchives%2F2010%2F03%2F04%2Fon-being-a-student-therapist-week-four%2F</link>
            <description>One of the &amp;#8220;fun&amp;#8221; parts of being a Master&amp;#8217;s student (fun in quotes because it depends on how you take it) is that you get to be a guinea pig. Not just in your own experience as a learner, but at the mercy of professors doing research, doctoral students conducting experiments, and random investigators from other universities sending out electronic surveys via email for you to fill out regarding all aspects of your counseling life. All of them say participation is completely optional and there’s no compensation, but would be very much appreciated. 
Last semester, I pretty much agreed to participate in everything. My helping nature made me think, “You might be asking others to do this someday yourself, and good karma comes around.”
This semester, I am way more protectiv...</description>
            <author>World of Psychology</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3331349</comments>
            <pubDate>Thu, 04 Mar 2010 16:30:51 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3331349</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>NAMI: Nearly 75 Percent of Funding from Pharma</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=2916167&amp;cid=t_355750_109_f&amp;fid=34750&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fpsychcentral.com%2Fblog%2Farchives%2F2009%2F10%2F22%2Fnami-nearly-75-percent-of-funding-from-pharma%2F</link>
            <description>As we noted in April, NAMI gets a significant portion of its funding from pharmaceutical companies. We had to guess at what that percentage was, however, because the National Alliance for Mental Illness (NAMI) refused to detail their pharmaceutical grants and donations in their annual reports and IRS filings.
At the time, I was generous and said that it&amp;#8217;s likely that 30 to 50 percent of NAMI&amp;#8217;s funding came from pharmaceutical companies. I was off. Way off.
The New York Times reported yesterday that nearly 75 percent of NAMI&amp;#8217;s funding comes from pharmaceutical companies &amp;#8212; $23 million over 3 years&amp;#8217; time:

The mental health alliance, which is hugely influential in many state capitols, has refused for years to disclose specifics of its fund-raising, saying the det...</description>
            <author>World of Psychology</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=2916167</comments>
            <pubDate>Thu, 22 Oct 2009 14:07:40 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">2916167</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>NAMI: Nearly 75 Percent of Donations from Pharma</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=2920247&amp;cid=t_355750_109_f&amp;fid=34750&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fpsychcentral.com%2Fblog%2Farchives%2F2009%2F10%2F22%2Fnami-nearly-75-percent-of-funding-from-pharma%2F</link>
            <description>As we noted in April, NAMI gets a significant portion of its funding from pharmaceutical companies. We had to guess at what that percentage was, however, because the National Alliance for Mental Illness (NAMI) refused to detail their pharmaceutical grants and donations in their annual reports and IRS filings.
At the time, I was generous and said that it&amp;#8217;s likely that 30 to 50 percent of NAMI&amp;#8217;s funding came from pharmaceutical companies. I was off. Way off.
The New York Times reported yesterday that nearly 75 percent of NAMI&amp;#8217;s donations come from pharmaceutical companies &amp;#8212; $23 million over 3 years&amp;#8217; time:

The mental health alliance, which is hugely influential in many state capitols, has refused for years to disclose specifics of its fund-raising, saying the de...</description>
            <author>World of Psychology</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=2920247</comments>
            <pubDate>Thu, 22 Oct 2009 12:12:58 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">2920247</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>The Stimulating Story of Dr. Robert Felner</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=2469444&amp;cid=t_355750_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FodcEodnBsyM%2F</link>
            <description>In 2003, after a stint heading up the school of education at the University of Rhode Island, Dr. Robert Felner took the same job at the University of Louisville. Two years later, he secured an earmarked  federal government grant for $694,000 from the Dept. of Education, ostensibly for a vast study of Kentucky public school performance. According to federal investigators, the money ended up in Dr. Felner&amp;#8217;s pockets instead. In fact, investigators allege that Felner and a partner in crime managed to defraud taxpayers of $2.3 million by promising to deliver educational assessment services that never materialized.
The checks and balances you might expect to have stopped this from happening were seldom checked and never balanced. And that&amp;#8217;s what&amp;#8217;s so stimulating about this...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=2469444</comments>
            <pubDate>Tue, 09 Jun 2009 14:35:55 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">2469444</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>GAO Should Probe FDA Oversight Of Researchers</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=1294730&amp;cid=t_355750_150_f&amp;fid=35777&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeeds.feedburner.com%2F%7Er%2FPharmalot%2F%7E3%2F249445171%2F</link>
            <description>A pair of Republican Congressmen want the Government Accountability Office to investigate delays by the FDA in disciplining researchers who break rules while testing drugs in people, Bloomberg News reports. Joe Barton of Texas and John Shimkus of Illinois wrote a letter to the GAO saying the FDA&amp;#8217;s oversight of clinical trials needs to be reviewed &amp;#8220;thoroughly.&amp;#8221; 
Their letter cited a Feb. 29 Bloomberg News report that said the FDA failed to complete disciplinary action against 12 researchers after proposing that they be disqualified from trials based on findings that they violated agency rules to protect patients and ensure accurate data. Cases have remained unresolved for as long as a decade, allowing researchers to work on more studies. 
The &amp;#8220;FDA has waited months a...</description>
            <author>Pharmalot</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=1294730</comments>
            <pubDate>Tue, 11 Mar 2008 11:21:46 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">1294730</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Within Our Grasp, Or Slipping Away?</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=485334&amp;cid=t_355750_87_f&amp;fid=34865&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.thecancerblog.com%2F2007%2F03%2F20%2Fwithin-our-grasp-or-slipping-away%2F</link>
            <description>Filed under: All Cancers, Research, Politics, Daily newsWithin Our Grasp, Or Slipping Away? Assuring a New Era of Scientific and Medical Progress is a twenty one page report written by Johns Hopkins University and seven other institutions.
These institutions petitioned Congress not to let biomedical research funding stagnate. The scientists say that funding for cancer, Alzheimer's disease and spinal cord injury research is not keeping up with the times.
The scientists argued years of stagnant budgets for the National Institute of Health interrupted promising research and drove young investigators into other careers. 
&quot;Warning bells should be sounding loudly in Congress and among the public, &quot; said Edward Miller, Hopkins dean and CEO. &quot;The world's premier biomedical research engine is at ri...</description>
            <author>The Cancer Blog</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=485334</comments>
            <pubDate>Tue, 20 Mar 2007 04:00:00 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">485334</guid>        </item>
    </channel>
</rss>

