Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
4
1

Citation Types

3
126
1
6

Year Published

2006
2006
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
6

Relationship

0
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 223 publications
(136 citation statements)
references
References 8 publications
3
126
1
6
Order By: Relevance
“…Specific epidemiological data should be presented in the explanation document of IC form (Illes et al., 2006; Morris et al., 2009). The IC documents and study protocol for brain imaging studies should include information that findings indicative of a significant health issue might be discovered in 0 to approximately 2% of participants, that the rate might amount to tens of percentages if milder findings are included, and that these findings are more likely to be found in elderly participants, based on the analysis of this study.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 3 more Smart Citations
“…Specific epidemiological data should be presented in the explanation document of IC form (Illes et al., 2006; Morris et al., 2009). The IC documents and study protocol for brain imaging studies should include information that findings indicative of a significant health issue might be discovered in 0 to approximately 2% of participants, that the rate might amount to tens of percentages if milder findings are included, and that these findings are more likely to be found in elderly participants, based on the analysis of this study.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Since the 2000s, many experts of brain imaging studies have discussed the significance of IFs (Grossman & Bernat, 2004; Illes, 2006; Illes, Desmond, Huang, Raffin, & Atlas, 2002; Illes, Rosen, et al., 2004; Illes et al., 2006; Wolf, 2008; Wolf, Lawrenz, et al., 2008). Some of the IFs that are encountered in brain imaging studies are life‐threatening and require urgent action (Hilgenberg, 2006; Underwood, 2012).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 2 more Smart Citations
“…UK Biobank reviewed current practice, the extensive literature 3, 5, 6 and relevant published guidance ( https://www.rcr.ac.uk/publication/management-incidental-findings-detected-during-research-imaging), sought independent legal advice, and consulted with its independent Ethics and Governance Council, the UK’s Royal College of Radiologists and Society and College of Radiographers, funders, relevant experts and leading imaging research projects (including the Multi-Ethnic Study of Atherosclerosis [ http://www.hopkinsmedicine.org/heart_vascular_institute/clinical_trials/preventive/mesa.html], the Reykjavik Heart Study [ http://www.hjartarannsokn.is/index.aspx?GroupId=406], the Rotterdam Scan Study 7 and the German National Cohort [ http://nako.de/]) 2 . Key contextual factors considered were the non-clinical setting of the imaging visit, in which the scanning sequences are optimised for research use rather than clinical diagnosis, and the nature of the participants’ existing consent (in particular the approach to the feedback of IFs).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%