Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31967411›Full record

ArticleEthics & human research2020

When IRBs Say No to Participating in Research about Single IRBs.

Robert Klitzman, Paul S Appelbaum, Alexandra Murray, Ekaterina Pivovarova, Deborah F Stiles, Charles W Lidz

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Ethics & human research, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
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

6 authors.

Robert KlitzmanProfessor of psychiatry and the director of the Masters of Science in Bioethics Program at Columbia University.
Paul S AppelbaumElizabeth K. Dollard professor of psychiatry, medicine and law and the director of the Center for Law, Ethics and Psychiatry at Columbia University.
Alexandra MurrayResearch coordinator at the University of Massachusetts Medical School.
Ekaterina PivovarovaAssistant professor of psychiatry at the University of Massachusetts Medical School.
Deborah F StilesChief operating officer and vice president for research operations and policy in the Office of Executive Vice President for Research at Columbia University.
Charles W LidzResearch professor emeritus of psychiatry at the University of Massachusetts Medical School.

Funding

Central IRBs: Enhanced Protections for Human Research Participants?R01GM113640 · NIGMS · UNIV OF MASSACHUSETTS MED SCH WORCESTER · PI LIDZ, CHARLES W · 2014 to 2016
$1.7M
NIGMS NIH HHS 5R01GM113640-03NIGMS NIH HHS R01 GM113640
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In response to a policy of the National Institutes of Health and requirements in the revised Common Rule, a protocol for a multisite study must be reviewed by a single institutional review board (IRB), rather than by the IRB at each study site. The goal of the single IRB approach is to increase the efficiency of IRB review of multisite research without jeopardizing protections for research subjects. Yet the extent to which these joint goals are being achieved is unclear. To better understand how single IRBs function, we recruited academic, government, and commercial single IRBs (N = 49) to participate in a study involving observation of protocol review meetings and/or interviews with their members, chairs, and administrators. Twenty (40.8%) agreed to participate, of which 50% agreed to both interviews and observation. While 81.8% (9/11) of academic and 50% (4/8) of government single IRBs participated in some way, only 23.3% (7/30) of commercial single IRBs did so. The four largest commercial single IRBs declined to participate. Because evaluation of single IRBs is important to inform development, implementation, monitoring, and refinement of federal policies, single IRBs should be encouraged to participate in research that examines how they function.

Indexed as

Conflict of InterestEthics Committees, ResearchHumansInterviews as TopicNational Institutes of Health (U.S.)ResearchUnited StatesCommon Rulehuman subjects researchIRBsmultisite studiesresearch ethicssingle IRBs

Identifiers

PMID31967411
PMCPMC9078204

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.