Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

Assessing the Quality and Performance of Human Research Protection Programs to Guide Compliance Oversight Activities

Assessing the Quality and Performance of Human Research Protection Programs to Guide Compliance... Routine on-site reviews should focus primarily on facilities that are at risk of harming human subjects. Using human research protection program performance metric data from 107 facilities, we defined a facility to be at risk when one of its noncompliance/incident rates was among the top three highest rates of that performance metric. Based on 14 performance metrics with noncompliance and incidents in 2017, 27 facilities were identified to be at risk. These 27 facilities at risk, while constituting only 25% of all facilities, contributed to 70% ± 25% (M ± SD; range = 32%-100%) of all reported noncompliance/incidents. Thus, performance metric data can be used to guide compliance oversight activities. http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Journal of Empirical Research on Human Research Ethics SAGE

Assessing the Quality and Performance of Human Research Protection Programs to Guide Compliance Oversight Activities

Loading next page...
 
/lp/sage/assessing-the-quality-and-performance-of-human-research-protection-0uKo4GpZf0

References (11)

Publisher
SAGE
Copyright
© The Author(s) 2018
ISSN
1556-2646
eISSN
1556-2654
DOI
10.1177/1556264618776460
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

Routine on-site reviews should focus primarily on facilities that are at risk of harming human subjects. Using human research protection program performance metric data from 107 facilities, we defined a facility to be at risk when one of its noncompliance/incident rates was among the top three highest rates of that performance metric. Based on 14 performance metrics with noncompliance and incidents in 2017, 27 facilities were identified to be at risk. These 27 facilities at risk, while constituting only 25% of all facilities, contributed to 70% ± 25% (M ± SD; range = 32%-100%) of all reported noncompliance/incidents. Thus, performance metric data can be used to guide compliance oversight activities.

Journal

Journal of Empirical Research on Human Research EthicsSAGE

Published: Jul 1, 2018

There are no references for this article.