We describe examples of institutional review board (IRB) actions that have delayed or thwarted research that could not conceivably be considered to pose more than minimal risk to participants. We propose three changes to improve the IRB process and reduce both human and financial costs.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
CeciS.J.PetersD.PlotkinJ.
(1985).
Human subjects review: Personal values and the regulation of social science research.
American Psychologist,
40,
994–1003.
2.
GoldmanJ.KatzM.D.
(1982).
Inconsistency and IRBs.
Journal of the American Medical Association,
248,
197–203.
3.
HymenD.
(2006).
Institutional review boards: Is this the least worst we can do?Northwestern Law Review,
101,
749–774.
