{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.015606242496998799, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 6.067796610169491, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Putting the lamentations of epidemiologists in perspective.

Epidemiologists have expressed concern about constraints upon the conduct of epidemiological research imposed by Institutional Review Boards (IRBs), attorneys, and both institutional and individual health services providers. The epidemiologists assert that these constraints, not necessarily required by law or sound policy, will deprive society of the benefits such research can yield. It is suggested that the complex of law and regulation, resulting from increased awareness of privacy and confidentiality interests, can often be dealt with if there is clearer understanding of the roles of attorneys, and flexibility shown by both epidemiologists and health services administrators and practitioners in the structuring and review of epidemiological research protocols.