Institutional review boards.

Levine, Robert J.

doi:10.1136/bmj.298.6683.1268

Cited by 5 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 4 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The function of Institutional Review Boards in reviewing and supervising research studies with human participants is vital. Ensuring that the projected research complies with ethical standards and protects the rights of participants is an essential function [43,44,45]. IRBs assess the study design, methodology, informed consent process, data collection procedures, and any potential risks or benefits associated with the research.…”

Section: Role Of Institutional Review Boards (Irbs)mentioning

confidence: 99%

Ethical Issues in Educational Research

Haneef,

Agrawal

2024

Asian Res. J. Arts Soc. Sci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Ethical issues are important aspects of research to make research practice honest and transparent. The researcher must follow specific rules and ethical guidelines to meet the expectations of the research community and academia. These rules and regulations are for fairness and integrity in the field of research. In this research paper, the authors have made a solemn effort to delineate the critical ethical issues and how they can degrade the quality of research and cause trouble to any investigator. This paper focuses on ethical issues, ethical standards, guidelines, and concerns of artificial intelligence so that no researcher faces any problem before, during, or after the study. As technology expands and its integration into education, teaching, and research emerges, the authors have stipulated that artificial intelligence can be a concern and threat to ethical standards in educational research.

show abstract

Section: Role Of Institutional Review Boards (Irbs)mentioning

confidence: 99%

Ethical Issues in Educational Research

Haneef,

Agrawal

2024

Asian Res. J. Arts Soc. Sci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The number of applications in a year varied from eight to 400, the size of the committees from four to 22, and the number of lay members from 0 (one committee) to four-with 16 of the sample of 28 committees having a practising nurse, 21 a general practitioner, four a lawyer, and 11 a pharmacist. Seven committees provided no printed information, and three held no meetings, the protocols being approved by post or in one instance in straightforward cases by the chairman.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Monitoring research ethical committees.

Lock¹

1990

BMJ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Here ethical review has always been voluntary; in the United States it has for long been a federal legal requirement, done mostly by institutional review boards. 16 Interestingly, 30 years ago Pappworth contended that voluntary control would not work, since it had never succeeded before-a view initially opposed by the formidable Oxford professor, Leslie Witts, but later supported by him. [17][18][19] Nevertheless, the American system has apparently produced a vast bureaucracy and thoughtful critics have suggested a semiofficial system instead -such as the two tiered system in Denmark, with central and regional committees on which there are equal numbers of lay and scientific representatives.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%