Suppr超能文献

地方机构审查委员会与联邦机构:不断变化的动态、体系及关系。

Local IRBs vs. federal agencies: shifting dynamics, systems, and relationships.

作者信息

Klitzman Robert L

机构信息

Columbia University, New York, NY, USA.

出版信息

J Empir Res Hum Res Ethics. 2012 Jul;7(3):50-62. doi: 10.1525/jer.2012.7.3.50.

Abstract

How IRBs relate to federal agencies, and the implications of these relationships, have received little, if any, systematic study. I interviewed 46 IRB chairs, directors, administrators, and members, contacting the leadership of 60 U.S. IRBs (every fourth one in the list of the top 240 institutions by NIH funding), interviewing IRB leaders from 34 (response rate=55%). IRBs describe complex direct and indirect relationships with federal agencies that affect IRBs through audits, guidance documents, and other communications, and can generate problems and challenges. Researchers often blame IRBs for frustrations, but IRBs often serve as the "local face" of federal regulations and agencies and are "stuck in the middle." These data have critical implications for policy, practice, and research.

摘要

机构审查委员会(IRB)与联邦机构之间的关系以及这些关系的影响,即便有过系统研究,也为数不多。我采访了46位IRB主席、主任、管理人员和成员,联系了60个美国IRB的负责人(按美国国立卫生研究院(NIH)资助排名前240的机构名单中的每第四个),采访了34个IRB的负责人(回复率 = 55%)。IRB描述了与联邦机构之间复杂的直接和间接关系,这些关系通过审计、指导文件和其他沟通方式影响IRB,并可能产生问题和挑战。研究人员常常因挫折而指责IRB,但IRB往往是联邦法规和机构的“当地代表”,处于“两难境地”。这些数据对政策、实践和研究具有至关重要的意义。

相似文献

1
Local IRBs vs. federal agencies: shifting dynamics, systems, and relationships.
J Empir Res Hum Res Ethics. 2012 Jul;7(3):50-62. doi: 10.1525/jer.2012.7.3.50.
2
US IRBs confronting research in the developing world.
Dev World Bioeth. 2012 Aug;12(2):63-73. doi: 10.1111/j.1471-8847.2012.00324.x. Epub 2012 Apr 20.
3
The ethics police?: IRBs' views concerning their power.
PLoS One. 2011;6(12):e28773. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0028773. Epub 2011 Dec 13.
4
From anonymity to "open doors": IRB responses to tensions with researchers.
BMC Res Notes. 2012 Jul 3;5:347. doi: 10.1186/1756-0500-5-347.
5
"Members of the same club": challenges and decisions faced by US IRBs in identifying and managing conflicts of interest.
PLoS One. 2011;6(7):e22796. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0022796. Epub 2011 Jul 29.
6
American Society of Clinical Oncology policy statement: oversight of clinical research.
J Clin Oncol. 2003 Jun 15;21(12):2377-86. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2003.04.026. Epub 2003 Apr 29.
7
How IRBs view and make decisions about coercion and undue influence.
J Med Ethics. 2013 Apr;39(4):224-9. doi: 10.1136/medethics-2011-100439. Epub 2012 Sep 14.
8
How local IRBs view central IRBs in the US.
BMC Med Ethics. 2011 Jun 23;12:13. doi: 10.1186/1472-6939-12-13.
9
How IRBs view and make decisions about consent forms.
J Empir Res Hum Res Ethics. 2013 Feb;8(1):8-19. doi: 10.1525/jer.2013.8.1.8.

引用本文的文献

1
Implications of the Revised Common Rule for Human Participant Research.
Chest. 2019 Feb;155(2):272-278. doi: 10.1016/j.chest.2018.09.022. Epub 2018 Oct 9.
2
The MICHR Genomic DNA BioLibrary: An Empirical Study of the Ethics of Biorepository Development.
J Empir Res Hum Res Ethics. 2015 Feb;10(1):37-48. doi: 10.1177/1556264614564975. Epub 2015 Jan 6.
3
Reviewing HIV-Related Research in Emerging Economies: The Role of Government Reviewing Agencies.
Dev World Bioeth. 2016 Apr;16(1):4-14. doi: 10.1111/dewb.12072. Epub 2014 Nov 10.
4
How US institutional review boards decide when researchers need to translate studies.
J Med Ethics. 2014 Mar;40(3):193-7. doi: 10.1136/medethics-2012-101174. Epub 2013 Mar 8.

本文引用的文献

1
The Myth of Community Differences as the Cause of Variations Among IRBs.
AJOB Prim Res. 2011;2(2):24-33. doi: 10.1080/21507716.2011.601284.
2
US IRBs confronting research in the developing world.
Dev World Bioeth. 2012 Aug;12(2):63-73. doi: 10.1111/j.1471-8847.2012.00324.x. Epub 2012 Apr 20.
3
The participation of community members on medical institutional review boards.
J Empir Res Hum Res Ethics. 2012 Feb;7(1):1-6. doi: 10.1525/jer.2012.7.1.1.
4
Views and experiences of IRBs concerning research integrity.
J Law Med Ethics. 2011 Fall;39(3):513-28. doi: 10.1111/j.1748-720X.2011.00618.x.
5
"Members of the same club": challenges and decisions faced by US IRBs in identifying and managing conflicts of interest.
PLoS One. 2011;6(7):e22796. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0022796. Epub 2011 Jul 29.
6
Reforming the regulations governing research with human subjects.
N Engl J Med. 2011 Sep 22;365(12):1145-50. doi: 10.1056/NEJMsb1106942. Epub 2011 Jul 25.
7
How local IRBs view central IRBs in the US.
BMC Med Ethics. 2011 Jun 23;12:13. doi: 10.1186/1472-6939-12-13.
8
The paradoxical problem with multiple-IRB review.
N Engl J Med. 2010 Oct 21;363(17):1591-3. doi: 10.1056/NEJMp1005101. Epub 2010 Oct 13.
9
Questioning the methodologic superiority of 'placebo' over 'active' controlled trials.
Am J Bioeth. 2009 Sep;9(9):34-48. doi: 10.1080/15265160903090041.

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验