324 research outputs found

    “Members of the Same Club”: Challenges and Decisions Faced by US IRBs in Identifying and Managing Conflicts of Interest

    Get PDF
    Conflicts of interest (COIs) in research have received increasing attention, but many questions arise about how Institutional Review Boards (IRBs) view and approach these. Methods: I conducted in-depth interviews of 2 hours each with 46 US IRB chairs, administrators, and members, exploring COI and other issues related to research integrity. I contacted leaders of 60 IRBs (every fourth one among the top 240 institutions by NIH funding), and interviewed IRB leaders from 34 of these institutions (response rate = 55%). Data were analyzed using standard qualitative methods, informed by Grounded Theory. Results: IRBs confront financial and non-financial COIs of PIs, institutions, and IRBs themselves. IRB members may seek to help, or compete with, principal investigators (PIs). Non-financial COI also often appear to be “indirect financial” conflicts based on gain (or loss) not to oneself, but to one's colleagues or larger institution. IRBs faced challenges identifying and managing these COI, and often felt that they could be more effective. IRBs' management of their own potential COI vary, and conflicted members may observe, participate, and/or vote in discussions. Individual IRB members frequently judge for themselves whether to recuse themselves. Challenges arise in addressing these issues, since institutions and PIs need funding, financial information is considered confidential, and COI can be unconscious. Conclusions: This study, the first to explore qualitatively how IRBs confront COIs and probe how IRBs confront non-financial COIs, suggests that IRBs face several types of financial and non-financial COIs, involving themselves, PIs, and institutions, and respond varyingly. These data have critical implications for practice and policy. Disclosure of indirect and non-financial COIs to subjects may not be feasible, partly since IRBs, not PIs, are conflicted. Needs exist to consider guidelines and clarifications concerning when and how, in protocol reviews, IRB members should recuse themselves from participating, observing, and/or voting

    To Protect Human Subjects, Review What Was Done, Not Proposed

    Get PDF
    The Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (ANPRM) released in 2011 by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) (1) recommends many important changes to federal regulations on protection of human research subjects. Perhaps most important, through the 74 questions it poses, it offers the opportunity to rethink approaches to research oversight. The current regulatory model of prospective review, based on what researchers say they plan to do, focuses the attention of Institutional Review Boards (IRBs, which must approve proposed research) and researchers on perfecting protocols and consent forms rather than interacting with subjects. Such a regulatory model may discourage innovation in human subjects protection. In contrast, we describe how a system based on retrospective, auditlike review of a subset of projects could stimulate assessment of the effectiveness of current approaches and the development of creative alternatives, with efficiencies for all concerned

    Editorial Commentary: Suspensory Fixation of Displaced Tibial Posterior Cruciate Ligament Avulsions: A Novel Application of a Familiar Technique

    Get PDF
    Isolated tibial posterior cruciate ligament avulsion fractures, although rare, are becoming increasingly common in regions of the world with frequent 2-wheel motor vehicle accidents. Arthroscopic-assisted suture fixation has become a popular fixation method for these injuries. Suspensory metal button fixation of tibial posterior cruciate ligament avulsion fractures, although commonly used for other applications, has until recently been limited to isolated reports of a few patients

    Laminar flow of two miscible fluids in a simple network

    Full text link
    When a fluid comprised of multiple phases or constituents flows through a network, non-linear phenomena such as multiple stable equilibrium states and spontaneous oscillations can occur. Such behavior has been observed or predicted in a number of networks including the flow of blood through the microcirculation, the flow of picoliter droplets through microfluidic devices, the flow of magma through lava tubes, and two-phase flow in refrigeration systems. While the existence of non-linear phenomena in a network with many inter-connections containing fluids with complex rheology may seem unsurprising, this paper demonstrates that even simple networks containing Newtonian fluids in laminar flow can demonstrate multiple equilibria. The paper describes a theoretical and experimental investigation of the laminar flow of two miscible Newtonian fluids of different density and viscosity through a simple network. The fluids stratify due to gravity and remain as nearly distinct phases with some mixing occurring only by diffusion. This fluid system has the advantage that it is easily controlled and modeled, yet contains the key ingredients for network non-linearities. Experiments and 3D simulations are first used to explore how phases distribute at a single T-junction. Once the phase separation at a single junction is known, a network model is developed which predicts multiple equilibria in the simplest of networks. The existence of multiple stable equilibria is confirmed experimentally and a criteria for their existence is developed. The network results are generic and could be applied to or found in different physical systems

    Misunderstandings Concerning Genetics Among Patients Confronting Genetic Disease

    Get PDF
    Critical questions arise about misunderstandings of genetics. We interviewed for 2 h each, 64 individuals who had or were at risk for Huntington's disease (HD), breast cancer or Alpha‐1 antitrypsin deficiency. These individuals revealed various misunderstandings that can affect coping, and testing, treatment and reproductive decisions. A therapeutic misconception about testing appeared: that testing would be helpful in and of itself. Many believed they could control genetic disorders (even HD), yet these beliefs were often incorrect, and could impede coping, testing, and treatment. Misunderstandings about statistics and genetics often fueled each other, and reflected denial, and desires for hope and control. Emotional needs can thus outweigh understandings of genetics and statistics, and providers’ input. Individuals often maintained non‐scientific beliefs, though embarrassed by these. These data have implications for care, and public and professional education. Misunderstandings’ persistence, despite realization of their inaccuracy, suggests that providers need to address not just cognitive facts, but underlying emotional issues
    • 

    corecore