Institutional Review Boards in Applied Settings: Their Role in Judgments of Quality and Consumer Protection

Abstract

Rosenthal (1994) has expressed the view that university institutional review boards (IRBs) should reject proposed studies of low quality and employ a cost/utility ratio when making such judgments Similarly, many IRBs in applied settings, particularly those agencies accredited by the Joint Commission on Accreditation of Health Care Organizations, follow a protocol for review in which IRB members are asked to determine if “the research will likely result in an increase in generalizable knowledge which is of vital importance for the understanding of the subject's disorder, condition, or state of health” (Prentice & Antonson, 1987, p 11) Unlike the university IRB, however, the IRB in an applied setting reviews a small number of proposals with an extremely narrow range of research and has a membership of individuals with experience in the field being researched Moreover, the importance of the research for the clients of the agency is more easily judged