Institutional Review Board (IRB)

867 Words2 Pages

The Institutional Review Board (IRB) is a body that protects individuals who participate in research and minimizes any risk of harm to the participants by providing oversight and guidance, which will ensure that the research is done in accordance with the policies, regulations, and laws (Grady, 2015). Any research that involves human subjects should, therefore, be reviewed by the International Review Board. The board is responsible for reviewing all the research activities that require the participation of human subjects and record its findings concerning adherence to IRB policies and procedures, federal regulations, scientific merit and ethical considerations. The IRB is responsible for reviewing the activities of the research to ensure that …show more content…

In the case of vulnerable participants, the IRB should also ensure that adequate safeguards are included in the research protocol. In case the research protocol does not meet these requirements, the IRB is also responsible for deciding whether to approve or disapprove the research, or make certain proposals for modifying the research protocol. Nonetheless, whenever the IRB disapproves a research, it should clearly state its reasons for disapproving and give the researcher a chance to respond to the statement either through a written letter or face to face with the board members (Ghooi, 2014). In circumstances whereby the research activity causes harm to the participants or goes against the requirements of the IRB, the board is responsible for terminating the research and issue a statement to the researcher. Nonetheless, if the board approves the research, it will be required to follow up with the activities of the research by monitoring and conducting an audit of the activities to determine whether they are compliant with the IRB policies and procedures as well as the federal regulations. If the research is non-compliant, then the board is responsible for terminating the activity and issuing a report to the federal government and the IRB officials (Grady, 2015). The continuing review of the approved …show more content…

For example, the IRB demands that a subject’s information is kept secret and private. However, the Federal government contradicts this statement by stating that ‘when appropriate,’ the researcher can reveal the participants' information. Certain research also requires the participants to know the results; according to the community-based participatory research (CBPR), the subject has the right to fully access information regarding their communities, homes, and bodies (Brown et al., 2010). If the participant wants the information to be publicly revealed, then the IRB has no reason to restrict its release. Nonetheless, some information can harm the subject psychologically, especially if the information reveals certain health problems about the subject, which do not have any clinical significance or if there are no appropriate means of treating the health problem (Brown et al., 2010). Such information can highly affect the subject, and this might cause great distress to the participant. Often, such a circumstance occurs during research that is aimed at determining the effects of environmental and household exposures to the individuals living in those areas. According to the IRB regulations and the National Bioethics Advisory Committee, the researchers are required to report the results to the subjects only if there is a major health implication or

Open Document