ArticleJournal of empirical research on human research ethics : JERHRE2019
Measuring IRB Regulatory Compliance: Development, Testing, and Use of the National Cancer Institute StART Tool.
Article in Journal of empirical research on human research ethics : JERHRE, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- A Rare Opportunity: Examining the Experience of a New Institutional Review Board.Journal of empirical research on human research ethics : JERHRE · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Institutional review boards (IRBs) have been criticized for overstepping their authority by requiring research protocols to meet requirements that go beyond regulatory approval criteria. The youngest National Cancer Institute (NCI) central IRB (CIRB), the Cancer Prevention and Control (CPC) CIRB, was studied with the NCI Stipulation Analysis Review Tool (StART), which categorized 1,049 stipulations in 51 determination letters covering 30 approved protocols. NCI StART reduced the potential for subjective uncertainty in assessing the wide range of content in the stipulations. The tool determined the board functioned in accordance with federal mandates, with 80% of rendered stipulations aligning with IRB approval criteria. A complementary article provides background data and findings from the first 3 years' experience of the CPC CIRB.
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.