Access the full text.
Sign up today, get DeepDyve free for 14 days.
Loading next page...
/lp/sage/what-can-irbs-learn-from-cabs-a-qualitative-analysis-of-the-zJo76VCF01
- Publisher
- SAGE
- Copyright
- © The Author(s) 2017
- ISSN
- 1556-2646
- eISSN
- 1556-2654
- DOI
- 10.1177/1556264617742237
- Publisher site
- See Article on Publisher Site
Abstract
Governments, funders, and institutional policies increasingly encourage and even mandate the involvement of nonscientists in the ethical review of research, most famously in institutional review boards (IRBs), but also on community advisory boards (CABs) and other committees that contribute to research governance. In spite of these requirements, few have examined how different factors such as recruitment strategies, training, and different qualifications shape the contributions of nonscientists to the research enterprise. This pilot study begins to fill in this lacuna by interviewing nonscientist members of IRBs and community members of CABs. Results suggest patterned differences in demographics, recruitment strategies, training, and perceived qualifications between community members on these two types of boards with potential implications for how we perceive the scope of contributions that nonscientists can provide to the ethical review of research and the strategic ways these contributions can be elicited.
Journal
Journal of Empirical Research on Human Research Ethics – SAGE
Published: Feb 1, 2018