ArticlePloS one2014
Is your ethics committee efficient? Using "IRB Metrics" as a self-assessment tool for continuous improvement at the Faculty of Tropical Medicine, Mahidol University, Thailand.
Article in PloS one, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 24 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
24 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 35 citations in OpenAlex.
- The negative impact of ad hoc committees for ethical evaluation: The case of COVID-19-related research in Ecuador.Developing world bioethics · 2021Pooled it
- Evaluating IACUCs: Previous Research and Future Directions.Journal of the American Association for Laboratory Animal Science : JAALAS · 2020Pooled it
- Exploring Researchers' Perspectives on Institutional Review Boards Functions in Saudi Arabia: A Survey Utilizing the IRB-RAT Tool.BMC medical ethics · 2025Article
- Exploring ethical considerations in medical research: Harnessing pre-generated transformers for AI-powered ethics discussions.PloS one · 2025Article
- Views from Multinational Pharmaceutical Companies on Allocation of Clinical Trials in Saudi Arabia-Qualitative Study.Pharmacy (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Institutional review boards in Saudi Arabia: the first survey-based report on their functions and operations.BMC medical ethics · 2023Article
- Performance of IRBs in China: a survey on IRB employees and researchers' experiences and perceptions.BMC medical ethics · 2022Article
- Understanding Constraints and Enablers of Turnaround Time for Ethics Review: The Case of Institutional Review Boards in Tanzania.Journal of empirical research on human research ethics : JERHRE · 2021Article
- Cross-cultural validation of the IRB Researcher Assessment Tool: Chinese Version.BMC medical ethics · 2021Article
- Developing Quality and Efficiency of Institutional Review Board Review Under a Human Research Protection Program at a Leading Hospital in Central Southern China: A Descriptive Analysis of the First Three Years.Journal of empirical research on human research ethics : JERHRE · 2021Article
- Evaluating assessment tools of the quality of clinical ethics consultations: a systematic scoping review from 1992 to 2019.BMC medical ethics · 2020Article
- How do 66 European institutional review boards approve one protocol for an international prospective observational study on traumatic brain injury? Experiences from the CENTER-TBI study.BMC medical ethics · 2020Article
- Assessing Research Ethics Committees in Myanmar: Results of a Self-Assessment Tool.Asian bioethics review · 2020Article
- Article
- Knowledge, Attitudes, and Practice Regarding Research Ethics Committees Among Health Care Faculty at Two Public Universities in Jordan.Journal of empirical research on human research ethics : JERHRE · 2019Article
- A Rare Opportunity: Examining the Experience of a New Institutional Review Board.Journal of empirical research on human research ethics : JERHRE · 2019Article
- Compliance with National Ethics Requirements for Human-Subject Research in Non-biomedical Sciences in Brazil: A Changing Culture?Science and engineering ethics · 2019Article
- Measuring IRB Regulatory Compliance: Development, Testing, and Use of the National Cancer Institute StART Tool.Journal of empirical research on human research ethics : JERHRE · 2019Article
- Capacity for ethical and regulatory review of herbal trials in developing countries: a case study of Moringa oleifera research in HIV-infected patients.Journal of pharmaceutical policy and practice · 2017Article
- A Case-Study of the Resources and Functioning of Two Research Ethics Committees in Western India.Journal of empirical research on human research ethics : JERHRE · 2016Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Tensions between researchers and ethics committees have been reported in several institutions. Some reports suggest researchers lack confidence in the quality of institutional review board (IRB) reviews, and that emphasis on strict procedural compliance and ethical issues raised by the IRB might unintentionally lead to delays in correspondence between researchers and ethics committees, and/or even encourage prevarication/equivocation, if researchers perceive committee concerns and criticisms unjust. This study systematically analyzed the efficiency of different IRB functions, and the relationship between efficiency and perceived quality of the decision-making process. The major purposes of this study were thus (1) to use the IRB Metrics developed by the Faculty of Tropical Medicine, Mahidol University, Thailand (FTM-EC) to assess the operational efficiency and perceived effectiveness of its ethics committees, and (2) to determine ethical issues that may cause the duration of approval process to be above the target limit of 60 days. Based on a literature review of definitions and methods used and proposed for use, in assessing aspects of IRB quality, an "IRB Metrics" was developed to assess IRB processes using a structure-process-outcome measurement model. To observe trends in the indicators evaluated, data related to all protocols submitted to the two panels of the FTM-EC (clinical and non-clinical), between January 2010-September 2013, were extracted and analyzed. Quantitative information based on IRB Metrics structure-process-outcome illuminates different areas for internal-process improvement. Ethical issues raised with researchers by the IRB, which were associated with the duration of the approval process in protocol review, could be considered root causes of tensions between the parties. The assessment of IRB structure-process-outcome thus provides a valuable opportunity to strengthen relationships and reduce conflicts between IRBs and researchers, with positive outcomes for all parties involved in the conduct of human-subject research.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.