Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Stakeholder Reflections on Implementing the National Institutes of Health's Policy on Single Institutional Review Boards.
Corneli, Amy; McKenna, Kevin; Hanlen-Rosado, Emily; Calvert, Sara B; Mah, Eric; Rosenfeld, Stephen J.
Affiliation
  • Corneli A; Associate professor in the Department of Population Health Sciences, a faculty member at the Duke Clinical Research Institute, and a lead social scientist of the Clinical Trials Transformation Initiative at Duke University School of Medicine.
  • McKenna K; Research program leader in the Department of Population Health Sciences and a senior research associate of the Clinical Trials Transformation Initiative at Duke University School of Medicine.
  • Hanlen-Rosado E; Research program leader in the Department of Population Health Sciences and a research associate of the Clinical Trials Transformation Initiative at Duke University School of Medicine.
  • Calvert SB; Director of projects in the Clinical Trials Transformation Initiative at Duke Clinical Research Institute at Duke University.
  • Mah E; Associate dean of clinical and translational research in the Department of Health Sciences at the University of California, San Diego.
  • Rosenfeld SJ; Executive director of North Star Review Board in Freeport, ME.
Ethics Hum Res ; 45(5): 15-26, 2023.
Article in En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37777977
ABSTRACT
The National Institutes of Health (NIH) requires use of a single institutional review board (sIRB) for multisite, nonexempt, NIH-funded research with human participants. The Clinical Trials Transformation Initiative (CTTI) conducted in-depth interviews with 34 stakeholders at two universities and in research administration leadership positions at multiple institutions about their experiences implementing the sIRB model, focusing on the NIH policy's goals soon after the policy was enacted. While some stakeholders suggested that using an sIRB has streamlined and reduced inefficiencies associated with the local IRB model, more stakeholders indicated that the sIRB model has not simplified the ethics review process and instead created new inefficiencies due to unclear roles and responsibilities for staff and institutions; a lack of systems and processes for implementing the sIRB model, including communication systems; and increased workloads. CTTI used these findings to propose a new framework for evaluating the NIH sIRB policy.
Subject(s)
Key words

Full text: 1 Collection: 01-internacional Database: MEDLINE Main subject: Biomedical Research Type of study: Prognostic_studies / Qualitative_research Aspects: Ethics Limits: Humans Country/Region as subject: America do norte Language: En Journal: Ethics Hum Res Year: 2023 Document type: Article

Full text: 1 Collection: 01-internacional Database: MEDLINE Main subject: Biomedical Research Type of study: Prognostic_studies / Qualitative_research Aspects: Ethics Limits: Humans Country/Region as subject: America do norte Language: En Journal: Ethics Hum Res Year: 2023 Document type: Article