Variations in Institutional Review Board Approval in the Implementation of an Improvement Research Study

The purpose of this paper is to report the variance in institutional review board (IRB) reviews as part of the implementation of a multisite, quality improvement study through the Improvement Science Research Network (ISRN) and recommend strategies successful in procuring timely IRB approval. Using...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Darpan I. Patel (Author), Kathleen R. Stevens (Author), Frank Puga (Author)
Format: Book
Published: Hindawi Limited, 2013-01-01T00:00:00Z.
Subjects:
Online Access:Connect to this object online.
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!

MARC

LEADER 00000 am a22000003u 4500
001 doaj_6c69ea307f5c4c77bea4c9187f99a7d9
042 |a dc 
100 1 0 |a Darpan I. Patel  |e author 
700 1 0 |a Kathleen R. Stevens  |e author 
700 1 0 |a Frank Puga  |e author 
245 0 0 |a Variations in Institutional Review Board Approval in the Implementation of an Improvement Research Study 
260 |b Hindawi Limited,   |c 2013-01-01T00:00:00Z. 
500 |a 2090-1429 
500 |a 2090-1437 
500 |a 10.1155/2013/548591 
520 |a The purpose of this paper is to report the variance in institutional review board (IRB) reviews as part of the implementation of a multisite, quality improvement study through the Improvement Science Research Network (ISRN) and recommend strategies successful in procuring timely IRB approval. Using correspondence documents as data sources, the level of review was identified and time to submission, time to approval, and time to study start were analyzed. Thirteen of the 14 IRBs conducted independent reviews of the project. Twelve IRBs approved the study through expedited review while two IRBs reviewed the project at a full board meeting. Lastly, 11 of the 14 sites required documented consent. The greatest delay in approval was seen early on in the IRB process with site PIs averaging 45.1 ± 31.8 days to submit the study to the IRB. IRB approvals were relatively quick with an average of 14 ± 5.7 days to approval. The delay in study submission may be attributed to a lack of clear definitions and differing interpretations of the regulations that challenge researchers. 
546 |a EN 
690 |a Nursing 
690 |a RT1-120 
655 7 |a article  |2 local 
786 0 |n Nursing Research and Practice, Vol 2013 (2013) 
787 0 |n http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2013/548591 
787 0 |n https://doaj.org/toc/2090-1429 
787 0 |n https://doaj.org/toc/2090-1437 
856 4 1 |u https://doaj.org/article/6c69ea307f5c4c77bea4c9187f99a7d9  |z Connect to this object online.