Download full text
Download full text
ERIC Number: EJ1181983
Record Type: Journal
Publication Date: 2018
Abstractor: As Provided
American Institutional Review Boards: Safeguards or Censorship?
Hottenstein, Kristi N.
Journal of Research Administration, v49 n1 p31-42 Spr 2018
The United States is a world leader in biomedical clinical research. America's existing human subject research regulations structure affords sizable protections for the ethical treatment of research volunteers. Early initiatives such as the Belmont Report were specific to federally funded research. Over the past several decades guidelines such as the Belmont Report, along with more stringent policies, have been applied to non-federally funded research and research in the social sciences, and have branched out over areas, which many argue, they were not initially intended. Institutional review boards were codified to protect human subjects, an ethical and noble concern, but arguably these regulations were hastened both in response to a highly publicized research experiment and political considerations. This article explores the creation of the American IRB [institutional review boards] system through the lens of John Kingdon's Multiple Streams Theory and examines critical viewpoints surrounding a longstanding inquisition over whether human subject research regulations are safeguards or censorship.
Descriptors: Guidelines, Governing Boards, Research Administration, Volunteers, Quality Assurance, Quality Control, Educational History, Federal Regulation, Public Policy, Academic Freedom, Policy Analysis, Educational Theories, Biomedicine, Censorship, Informed Consent, Prevention
Society of Research Administrators International. 500 North Washington Street Suite 300, Falls Church, VA 22046. Tel: 703-741-0140; Fax: 703-741-0142; e-mail: firstname.lastname@example.org; Web site: http://www.srainternational.org
Publication Type: Journal Articles; Reports - Evaluative
Education Level: N/A
Authoring Institution: N/A