Item Details

Print View

Proposed Revisions to the Common Rule [electronic resource]: Perspectives of Social and Behavioral Scientists

Robert Pool, rapporteur ; Committee on Revisions to the Common Rule for the Protection of Human Subjects in Research in the Behavioral and Social Sciences ; Board on Behavioral, Cognitive, and Sensory Sciences ; Division of Behavioral and Social Sciences and Education, National Research Council of the National Academies
Format
EBook; Book; Online
Published
Washington, D.C. : The National Academies Press, [2013]
Language
English
ISBN
0309288231 (pbk.), 9780309288231 (pbk.)
Summary
On July 26, 2011, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services issued an advance notice of proposed rule-making (ANPRM) with the purpose of soliciting comments on how current regulations for protecting research participants could be modernized and revised ... on how to better protect human subjects who are involved in research, while facilitating valuable research and reducing burden, delay, and ambiguity for investigators. The current regulations governing human subjects research were developed years ago when research was predominantly conducted at universities, colleges, and medical institutions, and each study generally took place at only a single site. Although the regulations have been amended over the years, they have not kept pace with the evolving human research enterprise, the proliferation of multi-site clinical trials and observational studies, the expansion of health services research, research in the social and behavioral sciences, and research involving databases, the Internet, and biological specimen repositories, and the use of advanced technologies, such as genomics ... [The summary] focuses on six broad topic areas: 1. Evidence on the functioning of the Common Rule and of institutional review boards (IRBs), to provide context for the proposed revisions. 2. The types and levels of risks and harms encountered in social and behavioral sciences, and issues related to the severity and probability of harm, because the ANPRM asks for input on calibration of levels of review to levels of risk. 3. The consent process and special populations, because new rules have been proposed to improve informed consent (e.g., standard consent form, consent for future uses of biospecimens, and re-consenting for further use of existing research data). 4. Issues related to the protection of research participants in studies that involve use of existing data and data sharing, because the ANPRM proposed applying standards for protecting the privacy of healthcare data to research data. 5. Multidisciplinary and multisite studies, because the ANPRM proposed a revision to the regulations that would allow multisite studies to be covered by a single IRB. 6. The purview and roles of IRBs, because the ANPRM included possible revisions to categories of research that could entail changes in IRB oversight. --
Contents
  • Session 1: Review of the Evidence
  • Session 2: Risks and Harms
  • Session 3: The Consent Process and Special Populations
  • Session 4: Data Use and Sharing and Technological Advancements
  • Session 5: Multisite and Multidisciplinary Studies
  • Session 6: Purview and Roles of Institutional Review Boards
  • Appendix A: Workshop Agenda
  • Appendix B: Biographical Sketches of Speakers.
Description
Mode of access: World wide Web.
Notes
  • "Workshop summary."
  • Includes bibliographical references.
Copyright Not EvaluatedCopyright Not Evaluated
Technical Details
  • Access in Virgo Classic
  • Staff View

    LEADER 05433cam a2200493 i 4500
    001 u6377539
    003 SIRSI
    005 20170608061650.0
    006 m d
    007 cr n
    008 140306s2013 dcu sb 100 0 eng d
    010
      
      
    a| 2013417376
    020
      
      
    a| 0309288231 (pbk.)
    020
      
      
    a| 9780309288231 (pbk.)
    035
      
      
    a| (WaSeSS)ssj0001185792
    040
      
      
    a| YDXCP b| eng c| YDXCP d| NRZ d| COO d| CUI d| DLC d| WaSeSS
    042
      
      
    a| lccopycat
    043
      
      
    a| n-us---
    050
    0
    0
    a| KF3827.M38 b| W67 2013
    111
    2
      
    a| Workshop on Proposed Revisions to the Common Rule in Relation to the Behavioral and Social Sciences d| (2013 : c| Washington, D.C.)
    245
    1
    0
    a| Proposed revisions to the common rule h| [electronic resource] : b| perspectives of social and behavioral scientists / c| Robert Pool, rapporteur ; Committee on Revisions to the Common Rule for the Protection of Human Subjects in Research in the Behavioral and Social Sciences ; Board on Behavioral, Cognitive, and Sensory Sciences ; Division of Behavioral and Social Sciences and Education, National Research Council of the National Academies.
    260
      
      
    a| Washington, D.C. : b| The National Academies Press, c| [2013]
    500
      
      
    a| "Workshop summary."
    504
      
      
    a| Includes bibliographical references.
    505
    1
      
    a| Session 1: Review of the Evidence -- Session 2: Risks and Harms -- Session 3: The Consent Process and Special Populations -- Session 4: Data Use and Sharing and Technological Advancements -- Session 5: Multisite and Multidisciplinary Studies -- Session 6: Purview and Roles of Institutional Review Boards -- Appendix A: Workshop Agenda -- Appendix B: Biographical Sketches of Speakers.
    520
      
      
    a| On July 26, 2011, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services issued an advance notice of proposed rule-making (ANPRM) with the purpose of soliciting comments on how current regulations for protecting research participants could be modernized and revised ... on how to better protect human subjects who are involved in research, while facilitating valuable research and reducing burden, delay, and ambiguity for investigators. The current regulations governing human subjects research were developed years ago when research was predominantly conducted at universities, colleges, and medical institutions, and each study generally took place at only a single site. Although the regulations have been amended over the years, they have not kept pace with the evolving human research enterprise, the proliferation of multi-site clinical trials and observational studies, the expansion of health services research, research in the social and behavioral sciences, and research involving databases, the Internet, and biological specimen repositories, and the use of advanced technologies, such as genomics ... [The summary] focuses on six broad topic areas: 1. Evidence on the functioning of the Common Rule and of institutional review boards (IRBs), to provide context for the proposed revisions. 2. The types and levels of risks and harms encountered in social and behavioral sciences, and issues related to the severity and probability of harm, because the ANPRM asks for input on calibration of levels of review to levels of risk. 3. The consent process and special populations, because new rules have been proposed to improve informed consent (e.g., standard consent form, consent for future uses of biospecimens, and re-consenting for further use of existing research data). 4. Issues related to the protection of research participants in studies that involve use of existing data and data sharing, because the ANPRM proposed applying standards for protecting the privacy of healthcare data to research data. 5. Multidisciplinary and multisite studies, because the ANPRM proposed a revision to the regulations that would allow multisite studies to be covered by a single IRB. 6. The purview and roles of IRBs, because the ANPRM included possible revisions to categories of research that could entail changes in IRB oversight. -- c| Source other than Library of Congress.
    538
      
      
    a| Mode of access: World wide Web.
    610
    1
    0
    a| United States. b| Department of Health and Human Services. t| Protection of human subjects v| Congresses.
    650
      
    0
    a| Human experimentation in medicine x| Law and legislation z| United States v| Congresses.
    650
      
    0
    a| Human experimentation in psychology x| Law and legislation z| United States v| Congresses.
    650
      
    0
    a| Research x| Moral and ethical aspects z| United States v| Congresses.
    650
      
    2
    a| Human experimentation.
    650
      
    2
    a| Ethics, Medical.
    650
      
    2
    a| Research x| standards.
    655
      
    0
    a| Electronic books.
    700
    1
      
    a| Pool, Robert, d| 1955-
    710
    2
      
    a| National Research Council (U.S.). b| Committee on Revisions to the Common Rule for the Protection of Human Subjects in Research in the Behavioral and Social Sciences.
    710
    2
      
    a| National Research Council (U.S.). b| Board on Behavioral, Cognitive, and Sensory Sciences.
    710
    2
      
    a| Ebook Central - Academic Complete
    710
    2
      
    a| National Academies Press Free eBooks
    776
    0
    8
    i| Online version: a| Pool, Robert, 1955- t| Proposed revisions to the common rule d| Washington, D.C. : The National Academies Press, [2013] w| (OCoLC)859258170
    856
    4
    0
    u| http://RE5QY4SB7X.search.serialssolutions.com/?V=1.0&L=RE5QY4SB7X&S=JCs&C=TC0001185792&T=marc
    596
      
      
    a| 1
    999
      
      
    a| XX(6377539.1) w| WEB i| 6377539-1001 l| INTERNET m| UVA-LIB t| INTERNET
▾See more
▴See less

Availability

Google Preview

Google Books Preview

Read Online