Document Type
Article
Publication Date
2008
Abstract
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 duty 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.
Publication Citation
15 Accountability in Research 242 (2008)
Recommended Citation
Tovino, Stacey A., "Incidental Findings: A Common Law Approach" (2008). Scholarly Works. 82.
https://scholars.law.unlv.edu/facpub/82
Included in
Contracts Commons, Health Law and Policy Commons, Law and Psychology Commons, Medical Jurisprudence Commons, Torts Commons