Literature DB >> 19139484

Working with the institutional review board.

Wesley G Byerly1.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: Working with an institutional review board (IRB) to ensure compliance and ethical conduct of research involving human subjects is discussed.
SUMMARY: The Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS) and Food and Drug Administration regulations for the conduct of human research are grounded in the principles of the Belmont Report. By establishing the requirements for the function and operation of the IRB, the criteria needed for the review and approval of research, and the requirements for obtaining and documenting informed consent, the federal regulations help ensure the safety, rights and welfare of subjects. In developing research protocols and submissions to the IRB, the investigator should include clear, detailed information that addresses the regulatory requirements for the review and approval of research. Before starting a research study, review and approval by the IRB is required unless the study is determined to be minimal risk and fits one of the defined categories. Some research projects involving observation of public behavior, collection of anonymous surveys of nonvulnerable individuals in which the information is not considered sensitive, and evaluation of standard education practices may be exempt from DHHS regulations. Informed consent is central to the protection of human subjects and is required unless the IRB allows a waiver or alteration of informed consent. Once the study is approved, the investigator must conduct the study as approved by the IRB and continue to meet the regulatory requirements related to modifications, reporting unanticipated events, and continuing review.
CONCLUSION: IRB review is integral to ensuring regulatory compliance and ethical conduct of research involving human subjects. Working closely with the IRB or colleagues who have had experience with the IRB will help junior investigators better understand the IRB submission and review process.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2009        PMID: 19139484     DOI: 10.2146/ajhp070066

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Am J Health Syst Pharm        ISSN: 1079-2082            Impact factor:   2.637


  6 in total

1.  Establishing Consumer Protections for Research in Human Service Agencies.

Authors:  Linda A LeBlanc; Melissa R Nosik; Anna Petursdottir
Journal:  Behav Anal Pract       Date:  2018-04-12

2.  Navigating the Institutional Review Board (IRB) Process for Pharmacy-Related Research.

Authors:  Marjorie Shaw Phillips; Osama Abdelghany; Susan Johnston; Rachel Rarus; Jennifer Austin-Szwak; Craig Kirkwood
Journal:  Hosp Pharm       Date:  2017-02

3.  Ethics Review for a Multi-Site Project Involving Tribal Nations in the Northern Plains.

Authors:  Jyoti Angal; Julie M Petersen; Deborah Tobacco; Amy J Elliott
Journal:  J Empir Res Hum Res Ethics       Date:  2016-02-28       Impact factor: 1.742

4.  Changes in the institutional review board submission process for multicenter research over 6 years.

Authors:  Monika Pogorzelska; Patricia W Stone; Elizabeth Gross Cohn; Elaine Larson
Journal:  Nurs Outlook       Date:  2010 Jul-Aug       Impact factor: 3.250

5.  Accuracy of ultrasound B-lines score and E/Ea ratio to estimate extravascular lung water and its variations in patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome.

Authors:  Benoît Bataille; Guillaume Rao; Pierre Cocquet; Michel Mora; Bruno Masson; Jean Ginot; Stein Silva; Pierre-Etienne Moussot
Journal:  J Clin Monit Comput       Date:  2014-05-13       Impact factor: 2.502

6.  Institutional review boards - a mixed blessing.

Authors:  Taimur Saleem; Umair Khalid
Journal:  Int Arch Med       Date:  2011-06-20
  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.