You are currently viewing the summary.
View Full TextLog in to view the full text
AAAS login provides access to Science for AAAS members, and access to other journals in the Science family to users who have purchased individual subscriptions.
More options
Download and print this article for your personal scholarly, research, and educational use.
Buy a single issue of Science for just $15 USD.
Summary
A new National Institutes of Health (NIH) policy aimed at boosting the rigor and transparency of clinical trials is triggering concerns among many behavioral scientists. They are worried that the agency’s widening definition of clinical trials could sweep up a broad array of basic science projects studying the human brain and behavior that do not test treatments. The clinical trials designation would impose a raft of new requirements on work that has already passed ethics review, such as different standards for applications submitted for funding, and a mandate to report results on clinicaltrials.gov, a public database. Critics say that would result in wasted resources and public confusion. NIH officials say they are still determining which behavioral studies will be defined as clinical trials.
This is an article distributed under the terms of the Science Journals Default License.
