Jump to ContentJump to Main Navigation
Human Subjects Research RegulationPerspectives on the Future$
Users without a subscription are not able to see the full content.

I. Glenn Cohen and Holly Fernandez Lynch

Print publication date: 2014

Print ISBN-13: 9780262027465

Published to MIT Press Scholarship Online: January 2015

DOI: 10.7551/mitpress/9780262027465.001.0001

Show Summary Details
Page of

PRINTED FROM MIT PRESS SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.mitpress.universitypressscholarship.com). (c) Copyright The MIT Press, 2017. All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the licence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of a monograph in MITSO for personal use (for details see http://www.mitpress.universitypressscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy).date: 12 December 2017

IRBs and the Problem of “Local Precedents”

IRBs and the Problem of “Local Precedents”

Chapter:
(p.173) 11 IRBs and the Problem of “Local Precedents”
Source:
Human Subjects Research Regulation
Author(s):

Laura Stark

Publisher:
The MIT Press
DOI:10.7551/mitpress/9780262027465.003.0015

Regulators have officially recognized what researchers have long known: human subjects review boards request different (sometimes contradictory) modifications to a given study before approval. In doing so, boards inadvertently delay research and create coordination problems, especially for multisite studies. This chapter summarizes an original ethnographic study of the meetings of US institutional review boards and introduces the concept of “local precedents” to explain why multisite research presents such a problem for boards. These ethnographic findings point to the specific shortcomings of the local-review model. To redress these shortcomings, the chapter identifies three types of review mechanisms that are configured differently from the local-review system: study networks, collegial review, and decision repositories. Several institutions are developing these alternative review mechanisms, and their experiences indicate the relative merits of each mechanism.

Keywords:   IRBs, Precedents, Case-based reasoning, Study networks, Multisite-study

MIT Press Scholarship Online requires a subscription or purchase to access the full text of books within the service. Public users can however freely search the site and view the abstracts and keywords for each book and chapter.

Please, subscribe or login to access full text content.

If you think you should have access to this title, please contact your librarian.

To troubleshoot, please check our FAQs, and if you can't find the answer there, please contact us.