The development and operation of IRBs: Medical regulations and social science

Journal of Applied Communication Research

Volumn 33, Issue 3, 2005, Pages 189-203

  Hamilton, Ann ^a,b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF OKLAHOMA   (United States)

^b AMERICAN UNIVERSITY OF SHARJAH   (United Arab Emirates)

Author keywords

Human subjects research; Institutional review board

Indexed keywords

EID: 27944493540     PISSN: 00909882     EISSN: 14795752     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/00909880500149353     Document Type: Review

References (53)

1. Advisory Committee on Human Radiation Experiments. (1995). Advisory committee on human radiation experiments, final report [Electronic version]. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office. Retrieved January 10, 2005, from http://www.eh.doe.gov/ohre/roadmap/ achre/index.html
2. Agar, M. (1980). The professional stranger: An informal introduction to ethnography. New York: Academic Press.
3. American Anthropological Association. (2001). Response to National Bioethics Advisory Commission (NBAC) report on human research ethics [Electronic version]. Retrieved January 10, 2005, from http://www.aaanet.org/gvt/resnbac. htm
4. American Association of University Professors. (2001). Protecting human beings: Institutional review boards and social science research [Electronic version]. Retrieved January 10, 2005, from http:// www.aaup.org/statements/ redbook/repirb.htm
5. American Political Science Association. (2001). APSA comments on the draft report, ethical and policy issues in research involving human participants [Electronic version]. Retrieved January 10, 2005, from http://www.cossa.org/ apsa.html
6. Baudrillard, J. (1988). Simulacra and simulations. In M. Poster (Ed.), Jean Baudrillard: Selected writings (pp. 166-184). Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
7. Beecher, H. (1966). Ethics and clinical research. The New England Journal of Medicine, 274, 1354-1360.
8. Belmont report [Electronic version]. (1979). Retrieved January 10, 2005, from http://www. nihtraining.com/ohsrsite/guidelines/belmont.html
9. Brainard, J. (2000a, February 4). Spate of suspensions of academic research spurs questions about federal strategy: A U.S. agency, its own future uncertain, unsettles college officials with its crackdown. Chronicle of Higher Education, 46, A29.
10. Brainard, J. (2000b, March 17). An inside look at how a university tries to protect human subjects: Federal scrutiny has led Duke to ease the huge workloads burdening its review boards. Chronicle of Higher Education, 46, A31.
11. Brainard, J. (2000c, April 14). Could better reports by researchers have prevented a clinical-trial death? Chronicle of Higher Education, 46, A45.
12. Brainard, J. (2000d, May 30). Government to reassign head of unit that oversees human-subjects research [Electronic version]. Chronicle of Higher Education, Daily News. Retrieved February 19, 2005, from http://chronicle.com/ prm/daily/2000/05/2000053002n.htm
13. Brainard, J. (2001a, March 9). The wrong rules for social science? Chronicle of Higher Education, 47, A21.
14. Brainard, J. (2001b, September 28). New federal science standards worry university researchers [Electronic version]. Chronicle of Higher Education, Daily News. Retrieved February 19, 2005, from http://chronicle.com/prm/daily/ 2001/09/2001092801n.htm
15. Brainard, J. (2002, March 29). New science measures released by OMB. Chronicle of Higher Education, 48, A25.
16. Brainard, J. (2003, October 31). Federal agency says oral-history research is not covered by human-subject rules. Chronicle of Higher Education, 50, A25.
17. Campbell, P. W. (1998, April 3). U.S. agencies seek to expand expedited reviews of research: Officials see little risk to humans in certain studies. The Chronicle of Higher Education, 44, A33.
18. Chasin, B. (2004, August 2). The Bush administration: Hazardous to our health and safety. ZNet, Retrieved January 10, 2005, from http://www.zmag.org/ content/showarticle. cfm?sectionid=33&itemid=5979
19. Dalai Lama. (1999). Ethics for the new millennium. New York: Riverhead Books.
20. Declaration of Helsinki [Electronic version]. (1964). Retrieved January 10, 2005, from http://www. nihtraining.com/ohsrsite/guidelines/helsinki.html
21. Denzin, N., & Lincoln, Y. (Eds.). (2000). Handbook of qualitative research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
22. Department of Health and Human Services, Office of Inspector General. (1998a). Institutional review boards: A time for reform (DHHS OIG Publication No. OEI-01-97-00193). Washington, DC: Author.
23. Department of Health and Human Services, Office of Inspector General. (1998b). Institutional review boards: The emergence of independent boards (DHHS OIG Publication No. OEI-01-97-00192). Washington, DC: Author.
24. Department of Health and Human Services, Office of Inspector General. (1998c). Institutional review boards: Their role in reviewing approved research (DHHS OIG Publication No. OEI-01-97-00190). Washington, DC: Author.
25. Department of Health and Human Services, Office of Inspector General. (2000a). Protecting human research subjects: Status of recommendations (DHHS OIG Publication No. OEI-01-97-00197) Washington, DC: Author.
26. Department of Health and Human Services, Office of Inspector General. (2000b). Recruiting human subjects: Pressures in industry-sponsored clinical research (DHHS OIG Publication No. OEI-01-97-00195). Washington, DC: Author.
27. Federal Policy for the Protection of Human Subjects, 45 C.F.R. § 46. (1991, June 18).
28. Foucault, M. (1972). The archaeology of knowledge and the discourse on language (A. M. Sheridan Smith, Trans.). New York: Pantheon Books.
29. Gans, H. J. (1982). The urban villagers: Group and class in the life of Italian-Americans. New York: Free Press.
30. Geertz, C. (1988). Works and lives: The anthropologist as author. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
31. Gray, B. H. (1982). The regulatory context of social and behavioral research. In T. Beauchamp, R. Faden, R. Wallace, Jr., & L. Walters (Eds.), Ethical issues in social science research (pp. 331-355). Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.
32. Hayes, G. J., Hayes, S. C., & Dykstra, T. (1995). A survey of university institutional review boards: Characteristics, policies, and procedures. IRB: A Review of Human Subjects Research, 17, 1-6.
33. Healy, P. (1999, July 30). Government to upgrade power of watchdog on human-subject research. Chronicle of Higher Education, 45, A28.
34. Humphreys, L. (1975). Tearoom trade: Impersonal sex in public places. New York: Aldine.
35. Kahn, J. P. (1998, January 26). Little cells, big issues [Electronic version]. CNN. Retrieved January 10, 2005, from http://www.cnn.com/health/ bioethics/9901/stem.cells/template.html
36. Kahn, J. P. (1999, June 1). Embryonic ethics [Electronic version]. CNN. Retrieved January 10, 2005, from http://www.cnn.com/health/bioethics/9906/ embryonic.ethics/index.html
37. Klockars, C. B. (1979). Dirty hands and deviant subjects. In C. B. Klockars, & F. W. O'Connor (Eds.), Deviance and decency: The ethics of research with human subjects (pp. 261-282). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
38. Lemonick, M., & Goldstein, A. (2002, April 22). At your own risk. Time, 159, 45-56.
39. Milgram, S. (1974). Obedience to authority: An experimental view. New York: HarperPerennial.
40. National Bioethics Advisory Commission. (2001). Ethical and policy issues in research involving human participants (Vol. 1). Bethesda, MD: Author.
41. National Institute on Drug Abuse. (1995). Qualitative methods in drug abuse and HIV research. (NIH Publication No. 95-4025). Washington, DC: Author.
42. National Research Act (1974). PL. 93-48.
43. Nuremberg code [Electronic version]. (1949). Retrieved January 10, 2005, from http://www. nihtraining.com/ohsrsite/guidelines/nuremberg.html
44. O'Connor, F. (1979). The ethical demands of the Belmont report. In C. Klockars, & F. O'Connor (Eds.), Deviance and decency: The ethics of research with human subjects (pp. 197-223). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
45. Office of Human Research Protections. (2001). Assurances [Electronic version]. Retrieved January 10, 2005, from http://www.hhs.gov/ohrp/assurances/ assurances_index.html
46. Office of Management and Budget. (2001). Guidelines for ensuring and maximizing the quality, objectivity, utility and integrity of information disseminated by federal agencies [Electronic version]. Retrieved January 10, 2005, from http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/fedreg/ final_information_quality_guidelines.html
47. Punch, M. (1998). Politics and ethics in qualitative research. In N. Denzin, & Y. Lincoln (Eds.), The landscape of qualitative research: Theories and issues (pp. 156-184). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
48. Rorty, R. (1979). Philosophy and the mirror of nature. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
49. U.S. House of Representatives. (1998, June 11). Institutional review boards: A system in jeopardy: Hearings before the U.S. House Subcommittee on Human Resources, of the House Committee on Government Reform and Oversight, 105th Cong., 2nd Sess.
50. Van Maanen, J. (1988). Tales from the field: On writing ethnography. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
51. Wax, R. (1971). Doing fieldwork: Warnings and advice. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
52. Weiss, R. (2004, August 16). "Data quality" law is nemesis of regulation [Electronic version]. Washington Post, p. A-1. Retrieved January 10, 2005, from http://www.washingtonpost.com/ ac2/wp-dyn/a3733-2004aug15
53. Weppner, R. S. (1977). Street ethnography. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.