Marie makes a very good point about the issue of federal funding. Of course, it
can be a wide issue because while a particular study which is not funded might
be found in violation, if there is any federal funding AT ALL coming into an
institution, it can all be frozen--that is a violation in a nonfunded study can
result in suspension of funds to a funded study within an institution.
In addition, while it's probably true that you only have to follow the CFR to
maintain federal funding, I think that in our litiginous society it is not a
bad idea, anyway, to follow the federal codes. It certainly provides one with a
good cushion in case of legal problems! The problem, generally, is that many
universities ARE being sued over what may seem like relatively innocuous
studies--even survey studies.
The whole brou ha ha, as I understand it, that nearly shut down Virginia
Commonwealth University, started with an objection by a relative of a subject,
to a couple of survey items, from a questionnaire that was part of a larger
study, and from there snowballed into an avalanche.
So, I'd still say that to follow the federal codes is probably a smart idea....
Annette
Quoting Marie Helweg-Larsen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> The original note from David Daniel does not indicate whether his
> university is receiving federal funding for human subjects research. The
> federal guidelines (that Annette provides a link to) only have to be
> followed IF the university is required to follow federal IRB guidelines
> which (as I understand it) they only have to do if they receive federal
> funding for research with human subjects. Perhaps David can expand here:
> are you asking what the federal guidelines require or are you asking
> what would be good for a voluntary IRB?
> Marie
>
> Annette Taylor wrote:
>
> >I think that federal codes ALWAYS supercede any "local" guidelines,
> >including APA guidelines. Note the difference between a "code"
> >and a "guideline".
> >
> >You should go to
> >http://ohrp.osophs.dhhs.gov/humansubjects/guidance/45cfr46.htm
> >where all of the details are spelled out precisely, including the
> >composition of the committee. And yes, you do need a community member...
> >
> >annette
> >
> >
> >
> >On Tue, 15 Oct 2002, David B. Daniel, Ph.D. wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> >>I think this has been discussed before but: What is the optimal
> membership
> >>make-up of a human subjects review board? We have a proposal to include a
> >>community member, an administrator and several faculty. Just wondering.
> >>
> >>David
> >>
> >>
> >> \\|//
> >> (o o)
> >> --------oOOo-(_)-oOOo----------------
> >>
> >>David B. Daniel, Ph.D.
> >>Department of Psychology Associate Research Scientist
> >>University of Maine at Farmington New England Research Institutes
> >>234 Main Street
> >>Farmington, ME 04938
> >>207-778-7411
> >>[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>---
> >>You are currently subscribed to tips as: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >>To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >
> >Annette Taylor, Ph. D.
> >Department of Psychology E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >University of San Diego Voice: (619) 260-4006
> >5998 Alcala Park
> >San Diego, CA 92110
> >
> > "Education is one of the few things a person
> > is willing to pay for and not get."
> > -- W. L. Bryan
> >
> >
> >
> >---
> >You are currently subscribed to tips as: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >
> >
>
>
>
> ---
> You are currently subscribed to tips as: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
---
You are currently subscribed to tips as: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
