Key points are not available for this paper at this time.
BACKGROUND: Research Ethics Boards, or Institutional Review Boards, protect the safety and welfare of human research participants. These bodies are responsible for providing an independent evaluation of proposed research studies, ultimately ensuring that the research does not proceed unless standards and regulations are met. MAIN BODY: Concurrent with the growing volume of human participant research, the workload and responsibilities of Research Ethics Boards (REBs) have continued to increase. Dissatisfaction with the review process, particularly the time interval from submission to decision, is common within the research community, but there has been little systematic effort to examine REB processes that may contribute to inefficiencies. We offer a model illustrating REB workflow, stakeholders, and accountabilities. CONCLUSION: Better understanding of the components of the research ethics review will allow performance targets to be set, problems identified, and solutions developed, ultimately improving the process.
Page et al. (Fri,) studied this question.