Research ethics boards: Size, not money
2006
Should Society Allow For-Profit Research Ethics Boards?
Commentary
Author Information
Author(s): Joal Hill
Primary Institution: Advocate Health Care
Hypothesis
Can for-profit IRBs effectively protect research subjects compared to non-profit IRBs?
Conclusion
For-profit IRBs may struggle to provide adequate oversight and understanding of local research contexts, potentially compromising the protection of research subjects.
Supporting Evidence
- For-profit IRBs may not adequately consider the local context of research subjects.
- Errors in consent forms approved by for-profit IRBs can compromise participant safety.
- Monitoring the consent process across multiple sites is challenging for a single IRB.
Takeaway
This article discusses whether research ethics boards that make money can still keep people safe during studies. The author thinks it's hard for them to do a good job.
Potential Biases
The author's perspective may be influenced by their own experiences with IRBs.
Limitations
The commentary does not provide empirical data or specific studies to support its claims.
Digital Object Identifier (DOI)
Want to read the original?
Access the complete publication on the publisher's website