Sage Journals: Discover world-class research

Abstract

Despite the importance of institutional review boards (IRBs) in protecting human subjects participating in research and the well-known benefits of performance measurements, there has been no systematic assessment of the quality and performance of IRBs. The IRB community has frequently cited the lack of credible metrics for measuring human subject protections and the quality of IRB ethics reviews as reasons for not measuring the quality and performance of IRBs. However, the IRB, with its well-defined missions, functions, structure, and procedures, should be readily amendable to performance measurements. In this brief commentary, I analyzed potential barriers for measuring the quality of IRBs and proposed ways to overcome these barriers.

Keywords

IRB quality IRB performance performance measurement human subject protections quality of IRB reviews

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Abbott

Grady

C. A.

(2011). A systematic review of the empirical literature evaluating IRBs: What we know and what we still need to learn. Journal Empirical Research on Human Research Ethics, 6(1), 3-19.

Anderson

J. A.

Sawatzky-Girling

McDonald

Willison

D. J.

(2011). Research ethics broadly writ: Beyond REB review. Health Law Review, 19(3), 12-24.

Association for the Accreditation of Human Research Protection Programs. (2018). Accreditation standards. Retrieved from http://www.aahrpp.org/apply/web-document-library/domain-i-organization

Cassel

C. K.

Conway

P. H.

Delbanco

S. F.

Jha

A. K.

Saunders

R. S.

Lee

T. H.

(2014). Getting more performance from performance measurement. The New England Journal of Medicine, 371, 2145-2147.

Gearhart

(2018). Seeking the holy grail of IRB quality. Retrieved from https://www.quorumreview.com/seeking-the-holy-grail-choosing-the-right-irb/

Institute of Medicine. (2001). Preserving public trust: Accreditation and human research participant protection programs. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.

Lidz

C. W.

Appelbaum

P. S.

Arnold

Candilis

Gardner

Myers

Simon

L. J.

(2012). How closely do institutional review boards follow the common rule? Academic Medicine, 87, 969-974.

National Commission for the Protection of Human Subjects of Biomedical and Behavioral Research. (1979). The Belmont report: Ethical principles and guidelines for the protection of human subjects of research. Washington, DC: Government Printing Office.

Nicholls

S. G.

Hayes

T. P.

Brehaut

J. C.

McDonald

Weijer

Saginur

Fergusson

(2015). A scoping review of empirical research relating to quality and effectiveness of research ethics review. PLoS ONE, 10(7), e0133639. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0133639

10.

Taylor

H. A.

(2007). Moving beyond compliance: Measuring ethical quality to enhance the oversight of human subjects research. IRB: Ethics & Human Research, 29(5), 9-14.

11.

Tsan

M.-F.

(2017). Assessing the quality of human research protection programs. Beau Bassin-Rose Hill, Mauritius: Scholars’ Press.

12.

Tsan

M.-F.

Nguyen

(2017). Effectiveness of human research protection program performance measurements. Journal of Empirical Research on Human Research Ethics, 12, 217-228.

13.

Tsoka-Gwegweni

J. M.

Wassenaar

(2014). Using the Emanuel et al. framework to assess ethical issues raised by a biomedical research ethics committee in South Africa. Journal of Empirical Research on Human Research Ethics, 9(5), 36-45.

14.

U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. (1991). Federal policy for the protection of human subjects (45 Code of Federal Registration [CFR] 46). Retrieved from http://www.hhs.gov/ohrp/regulations-and-policy/regulations/45-cfr-46/index.html

15.

U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Office of Inspector General. (1998). Institutional review boards: A time for reform. Retrieved from https://oig.hhs.gov/oei/reports/oei-01-97-00193.pdf

Measuring the Quality and Performance of Institutional Review Boards

Abstract

Keywords

Get full access to this article

References