Streamlining Ethical Review
- 16 November 2010
- journal article
- Published by American College of Physicians in Annals of Internal Medicine
- Vol. 153 (10), 655-657
- https://doi.org/10.7326/0003-4819-153-10-201011160-00008
Abstract
The review system for human subjects research in the United States has been widely criticized in recent years for requirements that delay research without improving human subject protections. Any major reformulation of regulations may take some time to implement. However, current regulations often allow for streamlined ethics review that does not jeopardize—and may improve—protections for research participants. The authors discuss underutilized options, including research that need not be classified as human subjects research, categories of studies that can be exempt from ethical review, studies that need only undergo expedited review by 1 institutional review board (IRB) member, and simplifying reviews of multicenter research by using the IRB of 1 institution. The authors speculate on multiple reasons for the underuse of these mechanisms and exhort IRBs and researchers to take advantage of these important opportunities to improve the review process.Keywords
This publication has 7 references indexed in Scilit:
- Grinding to a Halt: The Effects of the Increasing Regulatory Burden on Research and Quality Improvement EffortsClinical Infectious Diseases, 2009
- The Dysregulation of Human Subjects ResearchJAMA, 2007
- Variability in the Costs of Institutional Review Board OversightAcademic Medicine, 2006
- A Survey of IRB Process in 68 U.S. HospitalsJournal of Nursing Scholarship, 2004
- Ethical review of research involving human subjects: When and why is IRB review necessary?Muscle & Nerve, 2003
- Institutional Review Boards: A Crisis in ConfidenceAnnals of Internal Medicine, 2001
- Protection of human subjects: categories of research that may be reviewed by the Institutional Review Board (IRB) through an expedited review procedure--FDA. Notice.1998