• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

美国研究机构使用的信赖协议模板研究

A Study of Reliance Agreement Templates Used by U.S. Research Institutions.

作者信息

Resnik David B, Taylor Juliet, Morris Kathryn, Shi Min

机构信息

National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences.

Duke University, Bioethics and Science Policy Program.

出版信息

IRB. 2018 May-Jun;40(3):6-10. doi: 10.1002/eahr.403002. Epub 2018 May 1.

DOI:10.1002/eahr.403002
PMID:33707807
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7946149/
Abstract

We performed a content analysis of reliance agreement templates from 73 of the top U.S. research institutions ranked by research funding. 67.1% of institutions in our sample use the Office of Human Research Protections (OHRP) template and 8.2% use the SMART IRB template. Although a significant percentage of institutions (45.2%) use their own custom template, many of these also use the OHRP template or the SMART IRB template. 21.9% of institutional templates have only the OHRP minimum 10 contractual provisions (or elements), 27.4% have 11 elements, 26% have 12-19 elements, and 24.7% have 20 or more elements. 5.5% of institutional templates require the relied-upon institution to indemnify the relying institution, 6.8% require the relying institution to indemnify the relied-upon institution, 8.2% require the relied-upon institution to have liability insurance, 15.1% require the relying institution to have liability insurance, 2.7% require the relied-upon institution to have accreditation, and none require the relying institution to have accreditation. The number of elements in the template was positively associated with total research funding and private institutional control. Our data indicate that institutions which are seeking reliance agreements for cooperative research involving human subjects are not likely to encounter many difficulties because most are using commonly employed templates and are not imposing potentially disputable requirements on parties to the agreement.

摘要

我们对按研究经费排名的美国73家顶尖研究机构的依赖协议模板进行了内容分析。在我们的样本中,67.1%的机构使用人类研究保护办公室(OHRP)模板,8.2%的机构使用SMART IRB模板。尽管相当比例的机构(45.2%)使用自己定制的模板,但其中许多机构也使用OHRP模板或SMART IRB模板。21.9%的机构模板只有OHRP规定的最少10项合同条款(或要素),27.4%有11项要素,26%有12至19项要素,24.7%有20项或更多要素。5.5%的机构模板要求被依赖机构赔偿依赖机构,6.8%要求依赖机构赔偿被依赖机构,8.2%要求被依赖机构购买责任保险,15.1%要求依赖机构购买责任保险,2.7%要求被依赖机构获得认证,而没有要求依赖机构获得认证的。模板中的要素数量与总研究经费和私立机构控制呈正相关。我们的数据表明,寻求涉及人类受试者的合作研究依赖协议的机构不太可能遇到很多困难,因为大多数机构使用的是常用模板,并且没有对协议各方提出可能有争议的要求。

相似文献

1
A Study of Reliance Agreement Templates Used by U.S. Research Institutions.美国研究机构使用的信赖协议模板研究
IRB. 2018 May-Jun;40(3):6-10. doi: 10.1002/eahr.403002. Epub 2018 May 1.
2
How U.S. research institutions are responding to the single Institutional Review Board mandate.美国研究机构如何应对单一机构审查委员会的指令。
Account Res. 2018;25(6):340-349. doi: 10.1080/08989621.2018.1506337. Epub 2018 Aug 9.
3
American Society of Clinical Oncology policy statement: oversight of clinical research.美国临床肿瘤学会政策声明:临床研究监督
J Clin Oncol. 2003 Jun 15;21(12):2377-86. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2003.04.026. Epub 2003 Apr 29.
4
The SMART IRB platform: A national resource for IRB review for multisite studies.SMART IRB平台:多中心研究IRB审查的国家资源。
J Clin Transl Sci. 2019 Jul 29;3(4):129-139. doi: 10.1017/cts.2019.394. eCollection 2019 Aug.
5
The Harvard Catalyst Common Reciprocal IRB Reliance Agreement: an innovative approach to multisite IRB review and oversight.哈佛催化剂共同互惠机构审查委员会信赖协议:多中心机构审查委员会审查与监督的创新方法。
Clin Transl Sci. 2015 Feb;8(1):57-66. doi: 10.1111/cts.12202. Epub 2014 Sep 8.
6
Transitioning to the National Institutes of Health single institutional review board model: Piloting the use of the Streamlined, Multi-site, Accelerated Resources for Trials IRB Reliance.过渡到美国国立卫生研究院单一机构审查委员会模式:试用简化、多地点、加速试验 IRB 资源依赖的方法。
Clin Trials. 2019 Jun;16(3):290-296. doi: 10.1177/1740774519832911. Epub 2019 Mar 13.
7
Reliance agreements and single IRB review of multisite research: Concerns of IRB members and staff.多中心研究的信赖协议与单一机构审查委员会审查:机构审查委员会成员及工作人员的担忧
AJOB Empir Bioeth. 2018 Jul-Sep;9(3):164-172. doi: 10.1080/23294515.2018.1510437. Epub 2018 Oct 4.
8
Demonstration Project: Transitioning a Research Network to New Single IRB Platforms.示范项目:将研究网络过渡到新的单一 IRB 平台。
Ethics Hum Res. 2022 Nov;44(6):32-38. doi: 10.1002/eahr.500149.
9
Factors Associated with IRB Review Time in a Non-Federally Funded Study Using an sIRB of Record.使用记录 sIRB 的非联邦资助研究中与 IRB 审查时间相关的因素。
Ethics Hum Res. 2023 Jul-Aug;45(4):16-29. doi: 10.1002/eahr.500173.
10
Institutional Conflict of Interest Policies at U.S. Academic Research Institutions.美国学术研究机构的机构利益冲突政策。
Acad Med. 2016 Feb;91(2):242-6. doi: 10.1097/ACM.0000000000000980.

引用本文的文献

1
Reliance agreements and single IRB review of multisite research: Concerns of IRB members and staff.多中心研究的信赖协议与单一机构审查委员会审查:机构审查委员会成员及工作人员的担忧
AJOB Empir Bioeth. 2018 Jul-Sep;9(3):164-172. doi: 10.1080/23294515.2018.1510437. Epub 2018 Oct 4.
2
How U.S. research institutions are responding to the single Institutional Review Board mandate.美国研究机构如何应对单一机构审查委员会的指令。
Account Res. 2018;25(6):340-349. doi: 10.1080/08989621.2018.1506337. Epub 2018 Aug 9.

本文引用的文献

1
Single-Minded Research Review: The Common Rule and Single IRB Policy.专项研究综述:《通用规则》与单一机构审查委员会政策
Am J Bioeth. 2017 Jul;17(7):34-36. doi: 10.1080/15265161.2017.1328542.
2
Single IRBs in Multisite Trials: Questions Posed by the New NIH Policy.多中心试验中的单一独立伦理审查委员会:美国国立卫生研究院新政策引发的问题
JAMA. 2017 May 23;317(20):2061-2062. doi: 10.1001/jama.2017.4624.
3
Federal Policy for the Protection of Human Subjects. Final rule.《保护人类受试者联邦政策》。最终规则。
Fed Regist. 2017 Jan 19;82(12):7149-274.
4
How variability in the institutional review board review process affects minimal-risk multisite health services research.机构审查委员会审查过程的变异性如何影响低风险多地点卫生服务研究。
Ann Intern Med. 2012 May 15;156(10):728-35. doi: 10.7326/0003-4819-156-10-201205150-00011.
5
Burdens on research imposed by institutional review boards: the state of the evidence and its implications for regulatory reform.机构审查委员会给研究带来的负担:证据现状及其对监管改革的影响。
Milbank Q. 2011 Dec;89(4):599-627. doi: 10.1111/j.1468-0009.2011.00644.x.
6
The paradoxical problem with multiple-IRB review.多机构审查委员会审查中自相矛盾的问题。
N Engl J Med. 2010 Oct 21;363(17):1591-3. doi: 10.1056/NEJMp1005101. Epub 2010 Oct 13.
7
Local institutional review board (IRB) review of a multicenter trial: local costs without local context.多中心试验的地方机构审查委员会(IRB)审查:没有地方背景的地方成本。
Ann Neurol. 2010 Feb;67(2):258-60. doi: 10.1002/ana.21831.
8
Impact of institutional review board practice variation on observational health services research.机构审查委员会实践差异对观察性卫生服务研究的影响。
Health Serv Res. 2006 Feb;41(1):214-30. doi: 10.1111/j.1475-6773.2005.00458.x.
9
Cooperative research ethics review boards: a win-win solution?合作研究伦理审查委员会:双赢解决方案?
IRB. 2005 May-Jun;27(3):1-7.
10
Liability for institutional review boards: from regulation to litigation.
J Leg Med. 2004 Jun;25(2):131-84. doi: 10.1080/01947640490457451.