Hi 1. My comment was not about IRBs in general but about the guidelines for science fairs to which I was responding. It is clear in the quote I included from those guidelines that all human research needs vetting and approval.
2. With respect to IRBs more generally, if the IRB (or some designated individual in the IRB) makes the exempt determination, then in fact all human research needs vetting by the IRB. Take care Jim James M. Clark Professor of Psychology 204-786-9757 204-774-4134 Fax [EMAIL PROTECTED] >>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] 04-Dec-06 6:08:40 AM >>> Jim Clark wrote: But for the IRB, _all_ projects involving human participants must be reviewed, no matter how inocuous. --- Not necessarily. This point has been clarified in the IRB listserv. Obviously, exempt research does not need IRB oversight. But, the question is: Who decides whether a project is exempt or not? Most institutions' policies and procedures regarding human subjects research identify the IRB as the entity that should make this type of determination. Thus, typically, the head of the IRB or a member assigned to carry out expedited reviews examines the exempt protocol, confirms its status, and gives the green light (assuming that it is, in fact, exempt). However, that procedure is not mandated by federal policy. For institutions that do not have an IRB or a policy regarding such situations, then an investigator (or his/her supervisor; I guess it would be the teacher in the case of high schools) can make that determination. I think that, given our current climate, it is in the best interests for investigators to have the IRB make an exempt determination. Miguel --- To make changes to your subscription go to: http://acsun.frostburg.edu/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=tips&text_mode=0&lang=english --- To make changes to your subscription go to: http://acsun.frostburg.edu/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=tips&text_mode=0&lang=english
