The Illinois White Paper

Improving the System for Protecting Human Subjects: Counteracting IRB “Mission Creep

Datos Bibliográficos

ID2385161
AutoresC K Gunsalus (0000-0003-4018-533X, University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign), Edward M Bruner (University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign), Nicholas C Burbules (0000-0003-4956-5590, University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign), Leon Dash (University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign), Matthew Finkin (University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign), Matthew W Finkin, Joseph P Goldberg (University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign), William T Greenough (University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign), Gregory A Miller (0000-0002-2702-610X, University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign), Michael G Pratt (0000-0002-2917-1781, University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign), Masumi Iriye (University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign), Deb Aronson (University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign)
Año2007
Volumen13
Número5
Páginas617-649
Fecha de publicación2007-07-01
Peer ReviewedSí
Open AccessSí
TipoARTICLE
RevistaQualitative Inquiry (JOURNAL)
Identificadores de la revistaISSN: 1077-8004 • E-ISSN: 1552-7565
EditorialSAGE Publications Inc (PUBLISHER)
DOI10.1177/1077800407300785
OpenAlexW3125642032
IdiomaEN
Citas recibidas44
Referencias citadas15

Our system of research self-regulation, designed to provide internal checks and balances for those who participate in research involving human subjects, is under considerable stress. Much of this crisis has been caused by what we call mission creep, in which the workload of IRBs has expanded beyond their ability to handle effectively. Mission creep is caused by rewarding wrong behaviors, such as focusing more on procedures and documentation than difficult ethical questions; unclear definitions, which lead to unclear responsibilities; efforts to comply with unwieldy federal requirements even when research is not federally funded; exaggerated precautions to protect against program shutdowns; and efforts to protect against lawsuits. We recommend collecting data. We also call for refinements to our regulatory system that will provide a set of regulations designed for non-biomedical research. This will enable IRBs to direct attention to the areas of greatest risk while intentionally scaling back oversight in areas of lesser risk. We recommend removing some kinds of activity from IRB review altogether. Our system, if not broken, is seriously straining at the seams. It is imperative that we have a respected and effective system in place to protect human research subjects, so that much-needed research into the causes and prevention of disease and other research expanding the boundaries of knowledge can proceed. We hope that this White Paper will further the discussion about what reasonable procedures can be instituted to help get IRBs back on track and do what they were originally meant to do-protect the rights and welfare of human subjects while allowing the research enterprise to progress and its benefits to society to accrue

Business · Documentation · Economics · Engineering ethics · Management · Political science · Public relations · Risk analysis (engineering · Set (abstract data type · White paper · Workload · Computer Science · Engineering · Ethics in Clinical Research · Health Systems, Economic Evaluations, Quality of Life · Law · Pharmaceutical industry and healthcare