Literature DB >> 12589079

Current status of the institutional review boards in Korea: constitution, operation, and policy for protection of human research participants.

Ock-Joo Kim1, Byung-Joo Park, Dong-Ryul Sohn, Seung-Mi Lee, Sang-Goo Shin.   

Abstract

The institutional review board is crucial to ensure the scientific and ethical quality of human participant research. This paper analyzes a survey on the current constitution and operation of institutional review boards (IRBs) in Korea, conducted by the Korean Association of Institutional Review Boards in April 2002. Out of 74 IRBs, 63 responded to the survey (85.1% response rate). IRB membership has a male-to-female ratio of approximately 80:20, a predominance of male clinicians (60%) and an underrepresentation of community people unaffiliated to the institutions (less than 10%). Most IRBs (around 80%) confine the scope of their reviews to the clinical evaluation of drugs or devices, leaving the remaining areas of research involving human participants untouched. As their role is limited, the majority of IRBs do not operate actively: 72% of responding IRBs reviewed less than one protocol per month in 2001. Sixty two percent of institutions have never discussed the need for insuring research participants' risks or making indemnity arrangements. This survey reveals many shortcomings and points for improvement by the institutional support bodies, including the need to establish regular education programs for IRB members and investigators.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2003        PMID: 12589079      PMCID: PMC3054983          DOI: 10.3346/jkms.2003.18.1.3

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Korean Med Sci        ISSN: 1011-8934            Impact factor:   2.153


  6 in total

1.  A call for improved transparency in financial aspects of clinical trials: a case study of the CREATE-X trial in the New England Journal of Medicine.

Authors:  Akihiko Ozaki; Morihito Takita; Tetsuya Tanimoto
Journal:  Invest New Drugs       Date:  2018-03-08       Impact factor: 3.850

2.  An eight-year follow-up national study of medical school and general hospital ethics committees in Japan.

Authors:  Akira Akabayashi; Brian T Slingsby; Noriko Nagao; Ichiro Kai; Hajime Sato
Journal:  BMC Med Ethics       Date:  2007-06-29       Impact factor: 2.652

3.  An international survey of physicians regarding clinical trials: a comparison between Kyoto University Hospital and Seoul National University Hospital.

Authors:  Toshiko Ito-Ihara; Jeong-Hwa Hong; Ock-Joo Kim; Eriko Sumi; Soo-Youn Kim; Shiro Tanaka; Keiichi Narita; Taichi Hatta; Eun-Kyung Choi; Kyu-Jin Choi; Takuya Miyagawa; Manabu Minami; Toshinori Murayama; Masayuki Yokode
Journal:  BMC Med Res Methodol       Date:  2013-10-25       Impact factor: 4.615

4.  Perspectives of Singaporean biomedical researchers and research support staff on actual and ideal IRB review functions and characteristics: A quantitative analysis.

Authors:  Markus K Labude; Liang Shen; Yujia Zhu; G Owen Schaefer; Catherine Ong; Vicki Xafis
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2020-12-31       Impact factor: 3.240

5.  Students' evaluation of a team-based course on research and publication ethics: attitude change in medical school graduate students.

Authors:  Soo Young Kim
Journal:  J Educ Eval Health Prof       Date:  2008-12-22

Review 6.  ELSI practices in genomic research in East Asia: implications for research collaboration and public participation.

Authors:  Go Yoshizawa; Calvin Wai-Loon Ho; Wei Zhu; Chingli Hu; Yoni Syukriani; Ilhak Lee; Hannah Kim; Daniel Fu Chang Tsai; Jusaku Minari; Kazuto Kato
Journal:  Genome Med       Date:  2014-05-30       Impact factor: 11.117

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.