Federally regulated institutional review boards: The aspects of a "model" IRB---Is the current system in need of a tune up or complete overhaul?

Institutional Review Boards (IRBs) are the primary gatekeepers for the protection of ethical standards of federally regulated research on human subjects in this country. This paper focuses on what general, broad measures that may be instituted or enhanced to exemplify a "model IRB". This is done by examining the current regulatory standards of federally regulated IRBs, not private or commercial boards, and how many of those standards have been found either inadequate or not generally understood or followed. The analysis includes suggestions on how to bring about changes in order to make the IRB process more efficient, less subject to litigation, and create standardized educational protocols for members. The paper also considers how to include better oversight for multi-center research, increased centralization of IRBs, utilization of Data Safety Monitoring Boards when necessary, payment for research protocol review, voluntary accreditation, and the institution of evaluation/quality assurance programs. ^ This is a policy study utilizing secondary analysis of publicly available data. Therefore, the research for this paper focuses on scholarly medical/legal journals, web information from the Department of Health and Human Services, Federal Drug Administration, and the Office of the Inspector General, Accreditation Programs, law review articles, and current regulations applicable to the relevant portions of the paper. ^ Two issues are found to be consistently cited by the literature as major concerns. One is a need for basic, standardized educational requirements across all IRBs and its members, and secondly, much stricter and more informed management of continuing research. There is no federally regulated formal education system currently in place for IRB members, except for certain NIH-based trials. Also, IRBs are not keeping up with research once a study has begun, and although regulated to do so, it does not appear to be a great priority. This is the area most in danger of increased litigation. Other issues such as voluntary accreditation and outcomes evaluation are slowing gaining steam as the processes are becoming more available and more sought after, such as JCAHO accrediting of hospitals. ^ Adopting the principles discussed in this paper should promote better use of a local IRBs time, money, and expertise for protecting the vulnerable population in their care. Without further improvements to the system, there is concern that private and commercial IRBs will attempt to create a monopoly on much of the clinical research in the future as they are not as heavily regulated and can therefore offer companies quicker and more convenient reviews. IRBs need to consider the advantages of charging for their unique and important services as a cost of doing business. More importantly, there must be a minimum standard of education for all IRB members in the area of the ethical standards of human research and a greater emphasis placed on the follow-up of ongoing research as this is the most critical time for study participants and may soon lead to the largest area for litigation. Additionally, there should be a centralized IRB for multi-site trials or a study website with important information affecting the trial in real time. There needs to be development of standards and metrics to assess the performance of the IRBs for quality assurance and outcome evaluations. The boards should not be content to run the business of human subjects' research without determining how well that function is actually being carried out. It is important that federally regulated IRBs provide excellence in human research and promote those values most important to the public at large.^

Evaluation of a pilot diabetes educational intervention using the American Diabetes Association's Risk Assessment form with the patrons of The Health Museum, Houston Texas

Diabetes Mellitus is not a disease, but a group of diseases. Common to all types of diabetes is high levels of blood glucose produced from a variety of causes. In 2006, the American Diabetes Association ranked diabetes as the fifth leading cause of death in the United States. The complications and consequences are serious and include nephropathy, retinopathy, neuropathy, heart disease, amputations, pregnancy complications, sexual dysfunction, biochemical imbalances, susceptibility and sensitivity to many other diseases and in some cases death. ^ The serious nature of diabetes mellitus and its complications has compelled researchers to devise new strategies to reach population segments at high risk. Various avenues of outreach have been attempted. This pilot program is not unique in using a health museum as a point of outreach. However health museums have not been a major source of interventions, either. Little information was available regarding health museum visitor demographics, visitation patterns, companion status and museum trust levels prior to this pilot intervention. This visitor information will improve planning for further interventions and studies. ^ This thesis also examined prevalence data in a temporal context, the populations at risk for diabetes, the collecting agencies, and other relevant collected data. The prevalence of diabetes has been rapidly increasing. The increase is partially explained by refinement of the definition of diabetes as the etiology has become better understood. Increasing obesity and sedentary lifestyles have contributed to the increase, as well as the burdensome increase on minority populations. ^ Treatment options are complex and have had limited effectiveness. This would lead one to conclude that prevention and early diagnosis are preferable. However, the general public has insufficient awareness and education regarding diabetes symptoms and the serious risks and complications the disease can cause. Reaching high risk, high prevalence, populations is challenging for any intervention. During its “free family Thursdays” The Health Museum (Houston, Texas) has attracted a variety of ethnic patrons; similar to the Houston and Harris County demographics. This research project explored the effectiveness of a pilot diabetes educational intervention in a health museum setting where people chose to visit. ^