Overcoming a primary barrier to practice-based research: Access to an institutional review board (IRB) for independent ethics review.

Psychotherapy ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 55 (3) ◽  
pp. 255-262 ◽  
Author(s):  
Travis L. Osborne ◽  
Jason B. Luoma
Keyword(s):  
Institutional Review Board ◽  
Ethics Review ◽  
Institutional Review ◽  
Practice Based Research

Mobile Bodies: Reimagining Design Through a Dance Lens

2019 ◽  
Vol 21 (1) ◽  
pp. 29-41
Author(s):  
Merry L. Morris
Keyword(s):  
Assistive Technology ◽  
Design Thinking ◽  
Institutional Review Board ◽  
Technology Design ◽  
Creative Landscape ◽  
Institutional Review ◽  
The Disabled ◽  
Practice Based Research ◽  
Traditional Approaches

This article delves into the ways in which dance practice revises traditional approaches to assistive technology design, adding a productive dimension to current momentum in the design field at large. Based upon research with dancers who have disabilities that was approved by an Institutional Review Board, as well as practice-based research, the author examines the art of dance as a catalyst for reframing design thinking for assistive technology. Specifically, attention is drawn to the interpersonal and embodied facets of assistive technology. This research-based analysis expands the creative landscape in design thinking through attending to the disabled dancing body while carving an innovative space for dialogic intersections between the fields of dance, disability, and assistive technology design.

Ontario Cancer Research Ethics Board: Lessons Learned From Developing a Multicenter Regional Institutional Review Board

2008 ◽  
Vol 26 (9) ◽  
pp. 1479-1482 ◽  
Author(s):  
Raphael Saginur ◽  
Susan F. Dent ◽  
Lisa Schwartz ◽  
Ronald Heslegrave ◽  
Sid Stacey ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Lessons Learned ◽  
Institutional Review Board ◽  
Cancer Center ◽  
Roles And Responsibilities ◽  
Clinical Investigator ◽  
Ethics Review ◽  
Institutional Review ◽  
Clear Delineation ◽  
American Society ◽  
Institutional Participation

Purpose We describe issues and outcomes in the development of a specialized, central institutional review board (IRB) for multicenter oncology protocols. Numerous authoritative bodies have called for a change to the ethics review system to better manage multicenter trials in terms of quality, timeliness, and efficiency. In 2003, the American Society of Clinical Oncology proposed a network of regional IRBs for cancer. Previous experience with central IRBs has been met with mixed success. Methods We took a bottom-up approach to organizing a province-wide IRB, which was led by an IRB chair and a clinical investigator at one cancer center. Participation on the part of institutions was voluntary. Results Uptake in the first 2 years was modest and increased from 11 clinical trials in year 1 to 21 in year 2. In the third year, there was an apparent upsurge in the number of involved centers (14) and in the number of submitted clinical protocols (54). Conclusion Sponsors and investigators are loath to risk development of a novel IRB until there is a clear demonstration of quality, efficiency, and timeliness of decision. Development of a regional, specialized IRB requires considerable efforts to develop and maintain the trust of sponsors, investigators, and institutions despite prior demands for more efficient and timely ethics review. Voluntary institutional participation, clear delineation of roles and responsibilities, and effective execution promote development of this trust.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document