When a study is terminated because of low enrollment, it wastes the institutional resources that allowed it to be started including those of the IRB that approved it.
Conflicts of interest (COI) have been an important priority for IRBs and research institutions for decades.
When a human research protection office seeking accreditation finally has the site visit, the hard work that went into the process is not over. Now it's time to prepare the best possible response to the draft site visit report.
Serving on an IRB is a very important role that requires commitment and training. Yet, many research institutions that have very good training and evaluation programs for their staffs lack any sort of ongoing oversight of their IRB members.
The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) recently published its final rule on research conflicts of interest, titled, "Responsibility of Applicants for Protecting Objectivity in Research for which Public Health Service Funding is Sought and Responsible Prospective Contractors," in the Federal Register, Vol. 76, No. 165, Aug. 25, 2011.
One of the thorniest issues in tribal research is the question of who controls the use of the data taken from tribal members or tribal lands. Is it the researcher, who collected the data, or the tribe that gave permission for its collection and use?
