From anonymity to "open doors": IRB responses to tensions with researchers

BMC Research Notes

Volumn 5, Issue , 2012, Pages

  Klitzman, Robert ^a  

^a Och Spine at New York Presbyterian Hospitals   (United States)

Author keywords

Communication; Compliance; Ethics education; IRBs; Medical education; Organizational ethics; Professionalism; Research ethics; Responsible conduct of research

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; ATTITUDE; CONFLICT; ETHICS; FEMALE; HUMAN; INTERDISCIPLINARY COMMUNICATION; INTERVIEW; MALE; MANPOWER; MEDICAL RESEARCH; PERCEPTION; PERSONNEL; PRACTICE GUIDELINE; PROFESSIONAL STANDARD; PSYCHOLOGICAL ASPECT; STANDARD; UNITED STATES;

ATTITUDE; BIOMEDICAL RESEARCH; CONFLICT (PSYCHOLOGY); ETHICS COMMITTEES, RESEARCH; FEMALE; GUIDELINE ADHERENCE; GUIDELINES AS TOPIC; HUMANS; INTERDISCIPLINARY COMMUNICATION; INTERVIEWS AS TOPIC; MALE; PERCEPTION; PROFESSIONAL ROLE; RESEARCH PERSONNEL; UNITED STATES;

EID: 84863186233     PISSN: None     EISSN: 17560500     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1186/1756-0500-5-347     Document Type: Article

References (25)

1. The Illinois White Paper: improving the system for protecting human subjects: counteracting IRB mission creep. Gunsalus CK, Bruner EM, Burbules NC, Dash L, Finkin M, Goldberg JP, Greenough WT, Miller GA, Pratt MG, Iriye M, Aronson D, Qual Inq 2007 13 617 649 10.1177/1077800407300785
2. A review finds that multicenter studies face substantial challenges but strategies exist to achieve institutional review board approval. Greene SM, Geiger AM, J Clin Epidemiol 2006 59 784 790 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2005.11.018 16828670 (Pubitemid 43975723)
3. Bureaucratic ethics: IRBs and the legal regulation of human subjects research. Heimer CA, Petty J, Annu Rev Law Soc Sci 2010 6 601 626 10.1146/annurev.lawsocsci.093008.131454
4. Regulating research with human subjects: is the system broken? Fleischman AR, Trans Am Clin Climatol Assoc 2005 116 91 102 16555608
5. Research ethics committees: can they contribute to the improvement of clinical research in Europe? Liberati A, J Ambul Care Manag 2004 27 154 165 (Pubitemid 38365355)
6. The paradoxical problem with multiple-IRB review. Menikoff J, N Engl J Med 2010 363 1591 1593 10.1056/NEJMp1005101 20942660
7. Research ethics committees in Europe: implementing the directive, respecting diversity. Hedgecoe A, Carvalho F, Lobmayer P, Raka F, J Med Ethics 2006 32 483 486 10.1136/jme.2005.013888 16877630 (Pubitemid 44210085)
8. Federal Register: Human Subjects Research Protections: Enhancing Protections for Research Subjects and Reducing Burden, Delay, and Ambiguity for Investigators https://www.federalregister.gov/articles/2011/07/26/2011-18792/ human-subjects-research-protections-enhancing-protections-for-research-subjects- and-reducing-burden
9. Reforming the regulations governing research with human subjects. Emanuel EJ, Menikoff J, N Engl J Med 2011 365 12 1145 1150 Epub 2011 Jul 25 10.1056/NEJMsb1106942 21787202
10. The new censorship: Institutional Review Boards. Hamburger P, Supreme Court Rev 2004 271 354
11. Principal investigator views of the IRB system. Whitney SN, Alcser K, Schneider CE, McCullough LB, McGuire AL, Volk RJ, Int J Med Sci 2008 5 68 72 18392146 (Pubitemid 351871012)
12. The IRB paradox: could the protectors also encourage deceit? Keith-Spiegel P, Koocher GP, Ethics Behav 2005 15 339 349 10.1207/ s15327019eb1504/5 16578924 (Pubitemid 43242646)
13. Normal misbehavior: scientists talk about the ethics of research. De Vries R, Anderson MS, Martinson BC, JERHRE 2006 1 43 50 10.1525/jer.2006.1.1.43 16810336
14. Views and experiences of IRBs concerning research integrity. Klitzman R, J Law Med Ethics 2011 39 513 528 21871046
15. Members of the same club: challenges and decisions faced by US IRBs in identifying and managing conflicts of interest. Klitzman R, PLoS One 2011 6 22796 10.1371/journal.pone.0022796 21829516
16. How local IRBs view central IRBs in the US. Klitzman R, BMC Med Ethics 2011 12 13 10.1186/1472-6939-12-13 21699725
17. US IRBs confronting research in the developing world. Klitzman R, Dev World Bioeth Epub ahead of print doi: 10.1111/j.1471-8847.2012.00324.x.
18. The myth of community differences as the cause of variations among IRBs. Klitzman R, AJOB Prim Res 2011 2 24 33 10.1080/21507716.2011.601284
19. Geertz C, Interpretation of cultures: selected essays Basic Books, New York 1973
20. Strauss A, Corbin J, Basics of qualitative research - techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory Sage Publications, Newbury Park 1990 22396756
21. The ethics police?: IRBs views concerning their power. Klitzman R, PLoS One 2011 6 12 28773 10.1371/journal.pone.0028773 22174893
22. Delays and diversity in the practice of local research ethics committees. Ahmed AH, Nicholson KG, J Med Ethics 1996 22 263 266 10.1136/jme.22.5.263 8910776 (Pubitemid 26385479)
23. Moving from compliance to conscience: why we can and should improve on the ethics of clinical research. Kahn JP, Arch Intern Med 2001 161 925 928 10.1001/archinte.161.7.925 11295954 (Pubitemid 32295645)
24. Transforming the culture of biomedical research from compliance to trustworthiness: insights from nonmedical sectors. Yarborough M, Fryer-Edwards K, Geller G, Sharp RR, Acad Med 2009 84 472 477 10.1097/ACM.0b013e31819a8aa6 19318781
25. Beyond compliance: the role of institutional culture in promoting research integrity. Geller G, Acad Med 2010 85 1296 1302 10.1097/ACM. 0b013e3181e5f0e5 20671455