Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25600845›Full record

ArticleHEC forum : an interdisciplinary journal on hospitals' ethical and legal issues2015

Perceptions and experiences of community members serving on institutional review boards: a questionnaire based study.

M S Kuyare, Padmaja A Marathe, S S Kuyare, U M Thatte

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in HEC forum : an interdisciplinary journal on hospitals' ethical and legal issues, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
7.5field-weighted citation impact, top 3% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Barriers to Effective Deliberation in Clinical Research Oversight.HEC forum : an interdisciplinary journal on hospitals' ethical and legal issues · 2016
    Article
  3. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

M S KuyareBhaktivedanta Hospital, Sector 1, Srushti Complex, Mira Road, Thane, 401107, India.
Padmaja A Marathe
S S Kuyare
U M Thatte
King Edward Memorial Hospital and Seth G.S. Medical College · INBhaktivedanta Hospital & Research Institute · IN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The community representative plays a very important role in an institutional review board (IRB) but there is sparse data about their understanding of their role in an IRB. This study was conducted to assess perceptions of community members serving on IRBs of one region in India. A validated questionnaire (Cohen's kappa coefficient of 0.84) was administered to community members of IRBs in a prospective cross-sectional study. The questions related to demography, perceptions of their role in the IRB, experiences while serving on the IRBs, difficulties faced by them, and suggestions to improve their contributions. Of the 56 IRBs contacted, all 15 of the public institutions shared details of their community members, while only 26 of the 41 IRBs of private institutions responded. When questioned about why they joined the IRB, one third of the respondents said either that there was "no specific reason" for joining or that they accepted the invitation to serve on the insistence of other members of the IRBs or the head of their institution. All except one felt that community members were needed for optimal functioning. Six participants said that they did not review informed consent documents (ICD), and 10 were unaware that their presence was vital for quorum to be met. Twenty-eight said they participated actively in meetings and did not feel intimidated by the presence of clinicians. Twelve reported difficulties in understanding medical terminologies in ICDs. Although the majority of participants were aware about their role in an IRB, some did not review important documents such as ICDs. Restricted participation by private hospital IRBs was a striking observation in our study. There is a need to define eligibility criteria and develop targeted training modules for community members to ensure their effective contribution to effective oversight of clinical research.

Indexed as

Committee MembershipResidence CharacteristicsCross-Sectional StudiesEthics Committees, ResearchHumansIndiaPerceptionProspective StudiesSurveys and Questionnaires

Identifiers

PMID25600845
OpenAlexW2167635672

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.