• 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

沙特阿拉伯的机构审查委员会:基于调查的首次关于其职能和运作的报告。

Institutional review boards in Saudi Arabia: the first survey-based report on their functions and operations.

机构信息

Biostatistics, Epidemiology and Scientific computing Department, King Faisal Specialist Hospital and Research Center, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.

Neuroscience center, King Faisal Specialist Hospital and Research Center, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.

出版信息

BMC Med Ethics. 2023 Jul 10;24(1):50. doi: 10.1186/s12910-023-00928-7.

DOI:10.1186/s12910-023-00928-7
PMID:37430255
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10334562/
Abstract

BACKGROUND

Institutional review boards (IRBs) are formally designated to review, approve, and monitor biomedical research. They are responsible for ensuring that researchers comply with the ethical guidelines concerning human research participants. Given that IRBs might face different obstacles that cause delays in their processes or conflicts with investigators, this study aims to report the functions, roles, resources, and review process of IRBs in Saudi Arabia.

METHOD

This was a cross-sectional self-reported survey conducted from March 2021 to March 2022. The survey was sent to 53 IRB chairpersons and the administration directors (or secretary) across the country through email after receiving verbal consent. The validated survey consisted of eight aspects: (a) organizational aspects, (b) membership and educational training, (c) submission arrangements and materials, (d) minutes, (e) review procedures, (f) communicating a decision, (g) continuing review, and (h) research ethics committee (REC) resources. A total of 200 points indicated optimal IRB functions.

RESULTS

Twenty-six IRBs across Saudi Arabia responded to the survey. Overall, the IRBs in this study scored a total of 150/200 of the points on the self-assessment tool. Relatively newer IRBs (established less than ten years ago) conducted meetings at least once in a month, had annual funding, had more balanced gender representation, tended to score higher than older IRBs. The organizational aspect score was the lowest among all items in the survey (14.3 score difference, p-value < 0.01). The average turnaround time for expedited research from proposal submission to final decision was 7 days, while it was 20.5 days for the full committee review.

CONCLUSION

Saudi IRBs performed generally well. However, there is room for focused improvement with respect to extra resources and organizational issues that require closer evaluation and guidance from the regulatory bodies.

摘要

背景

机构审查委员会(IRB)是正式指定负责审查、批准和监测生物医学研究的机构。它们负责确保研究人员遵守涉及人类研究参与者的伦理准则。鉴于 IRB 可能面临导致其程序延迟或与研究人员产生冲突的不同障碍,本研究旨在报告沙特阿拉伯的 IRB 的职能、角色、资源和审查程序。

方法

这是一项横断面自我报告调查,于 2021 年 3 月至 2022 年 3 月期间进行。在获得口头同意后,通过电子邮件向全国的 53 名 IRB 主席和行政主任(或秘书)发送了经过验证的调查问卷。调查问卷由八个方面组成:(a)组织方面,(b)成员和教育培训,(c)提交安排和材料,(d)会议记录,(e)审查程序,(f)传达决定,(g)持续审查,和(h)研究伦理委员会(REC)资源。总分为 200 分,表明 IRB 功能最佳。

结果

沙特阿拉伯的 26 个 IRB 对调查做出了回应。总体而言,本研究中的 IRB 在自我评估工具上共得分为 150/200 分。相对较新的 IRB(成立不到十年)至少每月召开一次会议,有年度资金,性别代表性更加均衡,得分往往高于较旧的 IRB。组织方面的得分是调查中所有项目中最低的(得分差异 14.3,p 值<0.01)。从提案提交到最终决定的快速研究的平均周转时间为 7 天,而全委员会审查的时间为 20.5 天。

结论

沙特阿拉伯的 IRB 总体表现良好。然而,在额外资源和组织问题方面还有改进的空间,需要监管机构进行更密切的评估和指导。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/3ba6/10334562/c291882fa89f/12910_2023_928_Fig2_HTML.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/3ba6/10334562/7e2c6a450be1/12910_2023_928_Fig1_HTML.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/3ba6/10334562/c291882fa89f/12910_2023_928_Fig2_HTML.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/3ba6/10334562/7e2c6a450be1/12910_2023_928_Fig1_HTML.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/3ba6/10334562/c291882fa89f/12910_2023_928_Fig2_HTML.jpg

相似文献

1
Institutional review boards in Saudi Arabia: the first survey-based report on their functions and operations.沙特阿拉伯的机构审查委员会:基于调查的首次关于其职能和运作的报告。
BMC Med Ethics. 2023 Jul 10;24(1):50. doi: 10.1186/s12910-023-00928-7.
2
Evaluation of a University's Institutional Review Board Based on Campus Feedback: A Cross-Sectional Study.基于校园反馈对某大学机构审查委员会的评估:一项横断面研究。
Cureus. 2019 Oct 3;11(10):e5829. doi: 10.7759/cureus.5829.
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
Analysis of factors influencing the organizational capacity of Institutional Review Boards In China: a crisp-set Qualitative Comparative Analysis based on 107 cases.基于 107 个案例的中国机构审查委员会组织能力影响因素分析:基于硬集定性比较分析
BMC Med Ethics. 2023 Sep 26;24(1):74. doi: 10.1186/s12910-023-00956-3.
5
Operational Characteristics of Institutional Review Boards (IRBs) in the United States.美国机构审查委员会(IRB)的运作特点
AJOB Empir Bioeth. 2019 Oct-Dec;10(4):276-286. doi: 10.1080/23294515.2019.1670276. Epub 2019 Oct 16.
6
A study of warning letters issued to institutional review boards by the United States Food and Drug Administration.一项关于美国食品药品监督管理局发给机构审查委员会警告信的研究。
Clin Invest Med. 2004 Dec;27(6):316-23.
7
Review of multicenter studies by multiple institutional review boards: characteristics and outcomes for perinatal studies implemented by a multicenter network.多中心研究的综述:由多中心网络实施的围产期研究的特点和结果。
Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2015 Jan;212(1):110.e1-6. doi: 10.1016/j.ajog.2014.07.058. Epub 2014 Aug 1.
8
Understanding Constraints and Enablers of Turnaround Time for Ethics Review: The Case of Institutional Review Boards in Tanzania.理解伦理审查周转时间的限制因素和促进因素:以坦桑尼亚机构审查委员会为例。
J Empir Res Hum Res Ethics. 2021 Dec;16(5):514-524. doi: 10.1177/15562646211026855. Epub 2021 Jun 28.
9
Exception from informed consent: viewpoint of institutional review boards--balancing risks to subjects, community consultation, and future directions.知情同意的例外情况:机构审查委员会的观点——平衡对受试者的风险、社区咨询及未来方向
Acad Emerg Med. 2005 Nov;12(11):1050-5. doi: 10.1197/j.aem.2005.06.015.
10
Research consent by adolescent minors and institutional review boards.青少年未成年人的研究同意书与机构审查委员会
J Adolesc Health. 1995 Nov;17(5):323-30. doi: 10.1016/1054-139x(95)00176-s.

引用本文的文献

1
Behind the scenes of research ethics committee oversight: a qualitative research study with committee chairs in the Middle East and North Africa region.研究伦理委员会监督的幕后:在中东和北非地区进行的一项委员会主席的定性研究。
BMC Med Ethics. 2024 Aug 8;25(1):86. doi: 10.1186/s12910-024-01083-3.
2
Awareness of Medical Professionals Regarding Research Ethics in a Tertiary Care Hospital in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia: A Survey to Assess Training Needs.沙特阿拉伯利雅得一家三级医疗医院的医学专业人员对研究伦理的认知:一项评估培训需求的调查
Healthcare (Basel). 2023 Oct 12;11(20):2718. doi: 10.3390/healthcare11202718.

本文引用的文献

1
Institutional Review Boards: What Clinician Researchers Need to Know.机构审查委员会:临床研究人员须知
Mayo Clin Proc. 2019 Mar;94(3):515-525. doi: 10.1016/j.mayocp.2019.01.020.
2
Research approvals iceberg: how a 'low-key' study in England needed 89 professionals to approve it and how we can do better.研究审批的冰山:在英格兰,一项“低调”的研究为何需要 89 名专业人员来批准,以及我们如何才能做得更好。
BMC Med Ethics. 2019 Jan 25;20(1):7. doi: 10.1186/s12910-018-0339-5.
3
The IRB structure and medical research reform.机构审查委员会的结构与医学研究改革。
Clin Transl Med. 2018 Apr 2;7(1):10. doi: 10.1186/s40169-018-0188-3.
4
Clinical research ethics review process in Lebanon: efficiency and functions of research ethics committees - results from a descriptive questionnaire-based study.黎巴嫩的临床研究伦理审查过程:研究伦理委员会的效率与职能——基于描述性问卷调查研究的结果
Trials. 2018 Jan 11;19(1):27. doi: 10.1186/s13063-017-2397-2.
5
IRB Problems and Solutions in Health Communication Research.健康传播研究中的 IRB 问题与解决方案
Health Commun. 2018 Jul;33(7):907-916. doi: 10.1080/10410236.2017.1321164. Epub 2017 Jun 6.
6
Overall Assessment of Human Research and Ethics Committees in the United Arab Emirates.阿拉伯联合酋长国人类研究与伦理委员会的总体评估
J Empir Res Hum Res Ethics. 2017 Apr;12(2):71-78. doi: 10.1177/1556264617697522. Epub 2017 Mar 20.
7
A Case-Study of the Resources and Functioning of Two Research Ethics Committees in Western India.印度西部两个研究伦理委员会的资源与运作案例研究。
J Empir Res Hum Res Ethics. 2016 Dec;11(5):387-396. doi: 10.1177/1556264616636235. Epub 2016 Jul 31.
8
The Saudi Law of Ethics of Research on Living Creatures and its Implementing Regulations.沙特阿拉伯《生物研究伦理法》及其实施条例。
Dev World Bioeth. 2017 Aug;17(2):63-69. doi: 10.1111/dewb.12114. Epub 2016 Mar 3.
9
Those Responsible for Approving Research Studies Have Poor Knowledge of Research Study Design: a Knowledge Assessment of Institutional Review Board Members.负责批准研究项目的人员对研究设计的了解不足:对机构审查委员会成员的知识评估
Acta Inform Med. 2015 Aug;23(4):196-201. doi: 10.5455/aim.2015.23.196-201. Epub 2015 Jul 30.
10
Institutional Review Boards: Purpose and Challenges.机构审查委员会:目的与挑战。
Chest. 2015 Nov;148(5):1148-1155. doi: 10.1378/chest.15-0706.