Switch to
| Predicate | Object |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| lifeskim:mentions | |
| pubmed:issue |
5861
|
| pubmed:dateCreated |
1982-6-24
|
| pubmed:abstractText |
The most innovative aspect of institutional biosafety committees, responsible in the United States for local oversight of recombinant DNA research is mandatory participation from outside the institution. A survey of Californian committees and selected national data reveals wide variability in committee structure and procedures. Public participation, although constrained in various ways, has been generally constructive.
|
| pubmed:keyword | |
| pubmed:language |
eng
|
| pubmed:journal | |
| pubmed:citationSubset |
E
|
| pubmed:status |
MEDLINE
|
| pubmed:month |
May
|
| pubmed:issn |
0028-0836
|
| pubmed:author | |
| pubmed:issnType |
Print
|
| pubmed:day |
6
|
| pubmed:volume |
297
|
| pubmed:owner |
NLM
|
| pubmed:authorsComplete |
Y
|
| pubmed:pagination |
11-5
|
| pubmed:dateRevised |
2004-11-18
|
| pubmed:otherAbstract |
KIE: Using national data and the results of a California survey, Dutton and Hochheimer assess the impact of public participation on institutional biosafety committees responsible for regulation of recombinant DNA research. Committee members' responses to questionnaires and transcripts of meetings revealed a wide variety of organizational structures and procedures, and differences of opinion between scientist and non-scientist members as to the value of lay involvement in science policy. The authors conclude that these committees have set an important precedent for direct public participation in the decision process concerning science and technology.
|
| pubmed:meshHeading | |
| pubmed:year |
1982
|
| pubmed:articleTitle |
Institutional biosafety committees and public participation: assessing an experiment.
|
| pubmed:publicationType |
Journal Article
|