Literature DB >> 23485667

How IRBs view and make decisions about consent forms.

Robert L Klitzman1.   

Abstract

IRBs have been criticized for long and complicated consent forms, but how IRBs make decisions about these issues hasn't been examined. I contacted leaders of 60 IRBs, and interviewed IRB leaders from 34 (response rate = 55%), and 13 members and administrators. IRBs confront challenges and dilemmas regarding these documents: what and how much these forms should include (e.g., how "perfect" forms should be). While IRBs generally seek to decrease the length and complexity, institutions and industry funders often want these forms to be legal documents. IRBs may also "nitpick" these documents without realizing the costs. This study, the first to explore how IRBs view and make decisions about consent forms, suggests underlying tensions, ambiguities, and subjectivities that have important implications for future policy, practice, education, and research.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2013        PMID: 23485667      PMCID: PMC3752393          DOI: 10.1525/jer.2013.8.1.8

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Empir Res Hum Res Ethics        ISSN: 1556-2646            Impact factor:   1.742


  26 in total

1.  Who decides? A look at ethics committee membership.

Authors:  Raymond De Vries; Carl P Forsberg
Journal:  HEC Forum       Date:  2002-09

2.  Accountability, trust and informed consent in medical practice and research.

Authors:  Onora O'Neill
Journal:  Clin Med (Lond)       Date:  2004 May-Jun       Impact factor: 2.659

3.  Trust and informed consent: insights from community members on the Kenyan coast.

Authors:  C S Molyneux; N Peshu; K Marsh
Journal:  Soc Sci Med       Date:  2005-02-12       Impact factor: 4.634

Review 4.  A review finds that multicenter studies face substantial challenges but strategies exist to achieve Institutional Review Board approval.

Authors:  Sarah M Greene; Ann M Geiger
Journal:  J Clin Epidemiol       Date:  2006-03-15       Impact factor: 6.437

5.  Views and experiences of IRBs concerning research integrity.

Authors:  Robert Klitzman
Journal:  J Law Med Ethics       Date:  2011       Impact factor: 1.718

6.  How do institutional review boards apply the federal risk and benefit standards for pediatric research?

Authors:  Seema Shah; Amy Whittle; Benjamin Wilfond; Gary Gensler; David Wendler
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2004-01-28       Impact factor: 56.272

7.  Beyond "misunderstanding": written information and decisions about taking part in a genetic epidemiology study.

Authors:  Mary Dixon-Woods; Richard E Ashcroft; Clare J Jackson; Martin D Tobin; Joelle Kivits; Paul R Burton; Nilesh J Samani
Journal:  Soc Sci Med       Date:  2007-09-29       Impact factor: 4.634

8.  Variation among institutional review boards in evaluating the design of a multicenter randomized trial.

Authors:  A R Stark; J E Tyson; P L Hibberd
Journal:  J Perinatol       Date:  2009-10-01       Impact factor: 2.521

9.  How local IRBs view central IRBs in the US.

Authors:  Robert Klitzman
Journal:  BMC Med Ethics       Date:  2011-06-23       Impact factor: 2.652

10.  The ethics police?: IRBs' views concerning their power.

Authors:  Robert Klitzman
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2011-12-13       Impact factor: 3.240

View more
  11 in total

1.  Reading Level and Length of Written Research Consent Forms.

Authors:  Elaine Larson; Gabriella Foe; Rachel Lally
Journal:  Clin Transl Sci       Date:  2015-01-08       Impact factor: 4.689

2.  How IRBs view and make decisions about social risks.

Authors:  Robert L Klitzman
Journal:  J Empir Res Hum Res Ethics       Date:  2013-07       Impact factor: 1.742

3.  Perceived Risks and Benefits in a Text Message Study of Substance Abuse and Sexual Behavior.

Authors:  Erin E Bonar; Gerald P Koocher; Matthew F Benoit; R Lorraine Collins; James A Cranford; Maureen A Walton
Journal:  Ethics Behav       Date:  2017-03-10

4.  Standards of evidence for institutional review board decision-making.

Authors:  David B Resnik
Journal:  Account Res       Date:  2020-12-08       Impact factor: 3.057

5.  Ethical issues of informed consent in malaria research proposals submitted to a research ethics committee in Thailand: a retrospective document review.

Authors:  Pornpimon Adams; Sukanya Prakobtham; Chanthima Limpattaracharoen; Sumeth Suebtrakul; Pitchapa Vutikes; Srisin Khusmith; Polrat Wilairatana; Paul Adams; Jaranit Kaewkungwal
Journal:  BMC Med Ethics       Date:  2017-08-14       Impact factor: 2.652

6.  Culturally Competent Informed-Consent Process to Evaluate a Social Policy for Older Persons With Low Literacy: The Mexican Case.

Authors:  Emma Aguila; Beverly A Weidmer; Alfonso Rivera Illingworth; Homero Martinez
Journal:  Sage Open       Date:  2016-08-22

7.  Therapeutic Misconception in Psychiatry Research: A Systematic Review.

Authors:  Ivan Sk Thong; Meng Yee Foo; Min Yi Sum; Benjamin Capps; Tih-Shih Lee; Calvin Ho; Kang Sim
Journal:  Clin Psychopharmacol Neurosci       Date:  2016-02-29       Impact factor: 2.582

8.  Assessing Parent Decisions About Child Participation in a Behavioral Health Intervention Study and Utility of Informed Consent Forms.

Authors:  Stephanie A Kraft; Kathryn M Porter; Devan M Duenas; Erin Sullivan; Maya Rowland; Brian E Saelens; Benjamin S Wilfond; Seema K Shah
Journal:  JAMA Netw Open       Date:  2020-07-01

9.  Genomics, Big Data, and Broad Consent: a New Ethics Frontier for Prevention Science.

Authors:  Celia B Fisher; Deborah M Layman
Journal:  Prev Sci       Date:  2018-10

10.  Researchers' views on, and experiences with, the requirement to obtain informed consent in research involving human participants: a qualitative study.

Authors:  Antonia Xu; Melissa Therese Baysari; Sophie Lena Stocker; Liang Joo Leow; Richard Osborne Day; Jane Ellen Carland
Journal:  BMC Med Ethics       Date:  2020-10-02       Impact factor: 2.652

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.