An Overview of King Hussein Cancer Center Institutional Review Board Over 12 Years (2009-2020), Successes and Challenges, Including Those Imposed by the COVID-19 Pandemic.

IF 1.7 4区 哲学 Q2 ETHICS Journal of Empirical Research on Human Research Ethics Pub Date : 2022-02-01 Epub Date: 2021-11-22 DOI:10.1177/15562646211053234
Linda Kateb, Sawsan El-Jayousi, Maysa Al-Hussaini
{"title":"An Overview of King Hussein Cancer Center Institutional Review Board Over 12 Years (2009-2020), Successes and Challenges, Including Those Imposed by the COVID-19 Pandemic.","authors":"Linda Kateb,&nbsp;Sawsan El-Jayousi,&nbsp;Maysa Al-Hussaini","doi":"10.1177/15562646211053234","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p><i>The problem</i>: Running an efficient institutional review board (IRB) can be challenging. <i>The research subjects</i>: To ensure an efficient committee, our IRB adopted several operational metrics. <i>Methods</i>: Analysis of retrospective data from the IRB records, database, and annual reports over 12 years. <i>Results</i>: The IRB roster comprises 11 members. The average medical to nonmedical member ratio is 5:6, and the male to female ratio is 4:7, which has not been consistent over the years. One thousand three hundred and twenty-four proposals were reviewed including 1077 exempt (81.3%), 126 expedited (9.5%), and 121 full board (9.2%) with a median turnaround time to approval of 4.0, 35.0, and 68.0 days, respectively. Training of the IRB members was conducted to enhance their knowledge and skills. IRB at King Hussein Cancer Center has managed to stay abreast and efficient during the COVID-19 pandemic, by working remotely. <i>Conclusion</i>: Running an efficient IRB mandates implementing a number of operational metrics.</p>","PeriodicalId":50211,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Empirical Research on Human Research Ethics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2022-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Empirical Research on Human Research Ethics","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/15562646211053234","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2021/11/22 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ETHICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The problem: Running an efficient institutional review board (IRB) can be challenging. The research subjects: To ensure an efficient committee, our IRB adopted several operational metrics. Methods: Analysis of retrospective data from the IRB records, database, and annual reports over 12 years. Results: The IRB roster comprises 11 members. The average medical to nonmedical member ratio is 5:6, and the male to female ratio is 4:7, which has not been consistent over the years. One thousand three hundred and twenty-four proposals were reviewed including 1077 exempt (81.3%), 126 expedited (9.5%), and 121 full board (9.2%) with a median turnaround time to approval of 4.0, 35.0, and 68.0 days, respectively. Training of the IRB members was conducted to enhance their knowledge and skills. IRB at King Hussein Cancer Center has managed to stay abreast and efficient during the COVID-19 pandemic, by working remotely. Conclusion: Running an efficient IRB mandates implementing a number of operational metrics.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
侯赛因国王癌症中心机构审查委员会12年来(2009-2020年)的概况,成功和挑战,包括COVID-19大流行带来的挑战。
问题是:管理一个高效的机构审查委员会(IRB)可能具有挑战性。研究主题:为了确保委员会的效率,我们的内部审查委员会采用了几个操作指标。方法:回顾性分析来自IRB记录、数据库和年度报告的12年数据。结果:IRB名册包括11名成员。医务人员与非医务人员的平均比例为5:6,男女比例为4:7,多年来一直不一致。审查了1324份提案,包括1077份豁免(81.3%),126份加速(9.5%)和121份全员(9.2%),批准的平均周转时间分别为4.0,35.0和68.0天。为聘审局成员提供培训,以提高他们的知识和技能。侯赛因国王癌症中心的IRB通过远程工作,在COVID-19大流行期间保持了及时和高效。结论:运行一个有效的IRB要求实现一些操作指标。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.50
自引率
7.70%
发文量
30
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: The Journal of Empirical Research on Human Research Ethics (JERHRE) is the only journal in the field of human research ethics dedicated exclusively to empirical research. Empirical knowledge translates ethical principles into procedures appropriate to specific cultures, contexts, and research topics. The journal''s distinguished editorial and advisory board brings a range of expertise and international perspective to provide high-quality double-blind peer-reviewed original articles.
期刊最新文献
Understanding of Key Considerations for Effective Community Engagement in Genetics and Genomics Research: A Qualitative Study of the Perspectives of Research Ethics Committee Members and National Research Regulators in a low Resource Setting. Vulnerable Research Participant Policies at U.S. Academic Institutions. Considerations for the Design of Informed Consent in Digital Health Research: Participant Perspectives. Public Perspectives on Consent for and Governance of Biobanking in Japan. Comparison of Instructions to Authors and Reporting of Ethics Components in Selected African Biomedical Journals: 2008 and 2017.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1