Fostering IRB Collaboration for Review of International Research

American Journal of Bioethics

Volumn 14, Issue 5, 2014, Pages 3-8

  Barchi, Francis ^a   Kasimatis Singleton, Megan ^b   Merz, Jon F ^c  

^a RUTGERS UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA   (United States)

^c UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA   (United States)

Author keywords

Institutional review board; international research; multinational research; research ethics board; research partnership

Indexed keywords

ETHICS; HUMAN; HUMAN EXPERIMENT; INTERNATIONAL COOPERATION; LEGISLATION AND JURISPRUDENCE; MEDICAL RESEARCH; PROFESSIONAL STANDARD;

BIOMEDICAL RESEARCH; ETHICS COMMITTEES, RESEARCH; HUMAN EXPERIMENTATION; HUMANS; INTERNATIONAL COOPERATION;

EID: 84899627012     PISSN: 15265161     EISSN: 15360075     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/15265161.2014.892168     Document Type: Article

References (48)

1. AIDS International Training and Research Program. 2012. Dartmouth/MUHAS IRB training collaboration. Available at: http://www.dmsfogarty.org/component/content/article/49- irb (accessed November 30, 2012).
2. Al-Shahi, R. 2005. Research ethics committees in the UK-The pressure is now on research and development departments. Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine 98: 444-447.
3. Bartlett, E. 2012. Advance notice of proposed rulemaking: Summary of comments. February 28. Available at: http://www.hhs.gov/ohrp/sachrp/mtgings/2012 Feb Mtg/anprmebartlett.pdf and http://www.hhs.gov/ohrp/sachrp/mtgings/2012 Feb Mtg/anprmsummaryebartlett.pdf (accessed November 30, 2012).
4. Biomedical Research Alliance of New York. 2012. BRANY institutional review board services. Available at, (accessed November 30, 2012).
5. Cave, E., and S. Holm. 2002. New governance arrangements for research ethics committees: Is facilitating research achieved at the cost of participants' interest? Journal of Medical Ethics 28: 318-321.
6. Christian, M.C., J.L. Goldberg, J. Killen, et al. 2002. A central institutional review board for multi-institutional trials. New England Journal of Medicine 346(18): 1405-1408.
7. College of Public Health Sciences and the Ethics Review Committee for Research Involving Human Research Subjects, Health Sciences Group, Chulalongkorn University (ECCU). 2010. Regional workshop: Capacity building for the ethical review committee of health sciences research. Available at: http://whothailand.healthrepository.org/handle/123456789/603 (accessed November 30, 2012).
8. Council for International Organizations of Medical Sciences. 2002. International ethical guidelines for biomedical research involving human subjects. Available at: http://www.cioms.ch/publications/layout_guide2002.pdf (accessed November 30, 2012).
9. Davis, A. 2011. Alternative models of IRB review. Available at: http://primr.blogspot.com/2011/12/alternative-models-of-irb-review.html (accessed November 30, 2012).
10. Dawson, L., and N.E. Kass. 2005. Views of US researchers about informed consent in international collaborative research. Social Science & Medicine 61(6): 1211-1222.
11. Dowdy, D.W. 2006. Partnership as an ethical model for medical research in developing countries: The example of the "Implementation Trial." Journal of Medical Ethics 32(6): 357-360.
12. Emanuel, E.J., and J. Menikoff. 2011. Reforming the regulations governing research with human subjects. New England Journal of Medicine 365(12):1145-1150.
13. Gilman, R.H., and H.H. Garcia. 2004. Ethics review procedures for research in developing countries: A basic presumption of guilt. Canadian Medical Association Journal 171(3): 248-249.
14. Glickman, S.W., J.G. McHutchison, E.D. Peterson, et al. 2009. Ethical and scientific implications of the globalization of clinical research. New England Journal of Medicine 360(8): 816-823.
15. Hammatt, Z.H., J. Nishitani, K.C. Heslin, et al. 2011. Partnering to harmonize IRBs for community-engaged research to reduce health disparities. Journal of Health Care for the Poor and Underserved 22(4 SUPPL.): 8-15.
16. Hyder, A. A., S. A. Wali, A. N. Khan, et al. 2004. Ethical review of health research: A perspective from developing country researchers. Journal of Medical Ethics 30: 68-72.
17. Ijsselmuiden, C., D. Marais, D. Wassenaar, and B. Mokgatla-Moipolai. 2012. Mapping African ethical review committee activity onto capacity needs: The MARC initiative and HRWeb's interactive database of RECs in Africa. Developing World Bioethics 12(2): 74-86.
18. International Conference on Harmonization (ICH) of Technical Requirements for Registration of Pharmaceuticals for Human Use. 1996. Guideline for good clinical practice, E6. Available at: http://www.ich.org/products/guidelines/efficacy/article/efficacy-guidelines.html (accessed November 30, 2012).
19. IRBNet. 2012. Innovative solutions for compliance & research management. http//www.irbnet.org (accessed November 30, 2012).
20. IRBshare. 2012. Advancing collaboration. http://www.irbshare.org (accessed November 30, 2012).
21. Kass, N.E., A.A. Hyder, A. Ajuwon, et al. 2007. The structure and function of research ethics committees in Africa: a case study. PLoS Medicine 4(1): e3. doi:10.1371/journal.pmed.0040003
22. Kirigia, J.M., C. Wambebe, and A. Baba-Moussa. 2005. Status of national research bioethics committees in the WHO African region. BMC Medical Ethics 6: 10-16.
23. Klitzman, R.L. 2012. US IRBs confronting research in the developing world. Developing World Bioethics 12(2): 63-73.
24. London, L. 2002. Ethical oversight of public health research: Can rules and IRBs make a difference in developing countries? American Journal of Public Health 92(7): 1079-1084.
25. Macklin, R. 2001. After Helsinki: Unresolved issues in international research. Kennedy Institute of Ethics Journal 11(1): 17-36.
26. McNeil, C. 2007. Debate over institutional review boards continues as alternative options emerge. Journal of the National Cancer Institute 99(7): 502-503.
27. Musil, C.M., J. Mutabaazi, M. Walusimbi, et al. 2004. Considerations for preparing collaborative international research: A Ugandan experience. Applied Nursing Research 17(3): 195-200.
28. National Bioethics Advisory Commission. 2001. Ethical and policy issues in international research: Clinical trials in developing countries, Vol. 1. Available at: http://bioethics.georgetown.edu/nbac/human/overvol1.pdf (accessed November 30, 2012).
29. Nuffield Council on Bioethics. 1999. The ethics of clinical research in developing countries. Available at: http://www.nuffieldbioethics.org/sites/default/files/files/Clinical%20research%20in%20developing % 20countries % 20Discussion % 20Paper.pdf (accessed November 30, 2012).
30. Philippine Council for Health Research and Development. 2006. National Ethical Guidelines for Research. Available at: https://webapps.sph.harvard.edu/live/gremap/files/ph_natl_ethical_gdlns.pdf (accessed November 30, 2012).
31. Pittman, K. 2007. Streamlining scientific and ethics review of multi-center health and medical research in Australia: Report to the National Health and Medical Research Council. Available at: http://www.nhmrc.gov.au/health-ethics/national-approach-single-ethical-review (accessed May 1, 2013).
32. Ravinetto, R., A. Buvé, T. Halidou, et al. 2011. Double ethical review of North-South collaborative clinical research: hidden paternalism or real partnership? Tropical Medicine and International Health 16(4): 527-530.
33. Rennie, S. 2011. The globalization of research ethics committees: Paternalism, ethical imperialism or partnership. Available at: http://globalbioethics.blogspot.com/2011/04/globalization-of-research-ethics.html (accessed November 30, 2012).
34. United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization. 2005. Universal declaration on bioethics and human rights. Available at: http://portal.unesco.org/en/ev.php-URL_ID=31058&URL _ DO = DO _ TOPIC & URL _ SECTION = 201. html (accessed November 30, 2012).
35. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. 2011. Advanced notice of proposed rulemaking: Human subjects research protections: Enhancing protections for research subjects and reducing burden, delay and ambiguity for investigators. Federal Register 76: 44512-44531.
36. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. 2012. Protection of human subjects. Code of Federal Regulations,. Title 45, Part 46. Available at: http://www.hhs.gov/ohrp/humansubjects/guidance/45cfr46.html (accessed November 30, 2012).
37. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Food and Drug Administration. 2006. Guidance for industry: Using a centralized IRB review process in multicenter clinical trials. Available at: http://www.fda.gov/RegulatoryInformation/Guidances/ucm127004.htm (accessed November 30, 2012).
38. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Food and Drug Administration. 2012. Protection of human subjects. Code of Federal Regulations,. Title 21, Part 50. Available at: http://www.accessdata.fda.gov/scripts/cdrh/cfdocs/cfcfr/cfrsearch.cfm?cfrpart = 50 (accessed November 30, 2012).
39. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Office of Human Research Protections, National Institutes of Health, Association of American Medical Colleges, American Society of Clinical Oncology, and Department of Veteran's Affairs. 2006. National Conference on Alternative IRB Models: Optimizing human subject protection. Available at: https://www.aamc.org/download/75240/data/irbconf06rpt.pdf (accessed November 30, 2012).
40. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, National Institutes of Health. 2012a. Research portfolio online reporting tool (RePORT). Project number 1S07TW008852-01. Enhanced collaborative ethics committee review of research proposals. Available at: http://projectreporter.nih.gov/project_info_description.cfm?aid=8051319&icde=0 (accessed November 30, 2012).
41. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, National Institutes of Health. 2012b. Research portfolio online reporting tool (RePORT). Project number 1S07TW008850-01. Building a joint international IRB for Moi University and Indiana University. Available at: http://projectreporter.nih.gov/project_info_description.cfm?aid=8051263 (accessed November 30, 2012).
42. U.S. National Institutes of Health, Department of Health and Human Services, Office of Human Research Protections, Association of American Medical Colleges, and American Society of Clinical Oncology. 2005. Alternative models of IRB review (workshop summary report). Available at: http://www.hhs.gov/ohrp/archive/sachrp/documents/AltModIRB.pdf (accessed November 30, 2012).
43. Vegoe, E. 2012. Streamlining the IRB process. Available at: http://researchumn.com/2012/04/09/streamlining-the-irb-process (accessed November 30, 2012).
44. Wahlberg, A., C. Rehmann-Sutter, M. Sleeboom-Faulkner, et al. 2013. From global bioethics to ethical governance of biomedical research collaborations. Social Science & Medicine 98: 293-300.
45. White, M.T. 1999. Guidelines for IRB review of international collaborative medical research: A proposal. Journal of Law, Medicine & Ethics 27(1): 87-94.
46. Wood, A., C. Grady, and E.J. Emanuel. 2004. Regional ethics organizations for protection of human research participants. Nature Medicine 10(12): 1283-1288.
47. World Health Organization. 2000. Operational guidelines for ethics committees that review biomedical research. Available at: http://www.who.int/tdr/publications/documents/ethics.pdf (accessed November 30, 2012).
48. World Medical Association. 2008. Declaration of Helsinki-Ethical principles for medical research involving human subjects. Available at: http://www.wma.net/en/30publications/10policies/b3 (accessed November 30, 2012).