Khin-Maung-GyiF. Local and central IRBs: a single mission. Virtual Mentor, 2009; 11:317–20.
2.
Executive Office of the President President's Council of Advisors on Science Technology. 2010. Report to the President—Realizing the full potential of health information technology to improve healthcare for Americans: the path forward. www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/microsites/ostp/pcast-health-it-report.pdf. 2011 Mar. 29.
3.
IOM (Institute of Medicine). 2009. Beyond the HIPAA privacy rule: enhancing privacy, improving health through research. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.
4.
HelfandBT, MongiuAK, RoehrbornCGet al.MIST Investigators. Variation in institutional review board responses to a standard protocol for a multicenter randomized, controlled surgical trial. Journal of Urology, 2009; 181:2675–9.
5.
StarkAR, TysonJE, HibberdPL. Variation among institutional review board in evaluating the design of a multicenter randomized trial. Journal of Perinatology, 2010; 30:163–9.
6.
FinchSA, BarkinSL, WassermanRCet al.Effects of local institutional review board review on participation in national practice-based research network studies. Archives of Pediatrics & Adolescent Medicine, 2009; 163:1130–4.
7.
PogorzelskaM, StonePW, CohnEGet al.Changes in the institutional review board submission process for multicenter research over 6 years. Nursing Outlook, 2010; 58:181–7.
8.
ColemanS. Alternative IRB review. Journal of Clinical Research Best Practices 2009; 5(4)http://firstclinical.com/journal/2009/0904_Alternative.pdf. 2011 Mar. 29.
9.
WhitneySN, AlcserK, SchneiderCEet al.Principal investigator views of the IRB system. International Journal of Medical Sciences, 2008; 5:68–72.
10.
Infectious Diseases Society of America. Grinding to a halt: the effects of the increasing regulatory burden on research and quality improvement efforts. Clinical & Infectious Diseases, 2009; 49:328–35.
11.
KimS, UbelP, De VriesR. Pruning the regulatory tree. Nature, 2009; 457:534–5.
