Journalists, district attorneys and researchers: why IRBs should get in the middle

BMC Medical Ethics 16 (1):19 (2015)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

Federal regulations in the United States have shaped Institutional Review Boards to focus on protecting individual human subjects. Health services research studies focusing on healthcare institutions such as hospitals or clinics do not have individual human subjects. Since U.S. federal regulations are silent on what type of review, if any, these studies require, different IRBs may approach similar studies differently, resulting in undesirable variation in the review of studies focusing on healthcare institutions. Further, although these studies do not focus on individual human subjects, they may pose risks to participating institutions, as well as individuals who work at those institutions, if identifying information becomes public.

Other Versions

No versions found

Similar books and articles

Analytics

Added to PP
2015-03-30

Downloads
118 (#399,953)

6 months
22 (#468,057)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

References found in this work

Debriefing and Accountability in Deceptive Research.Franklin G. Miller, John P. Gluck Jr & David Wendler - 2008 - Kennedy Institute of Ethics Journal 18 (3):235-251.
Moral accountability and debriefing.Bryan Benham - 2008 - Kennedy Institute of Ethics Journal 18 (3):pp. 253-273.

Add more references