The University's Research Advisory Board received its latest round of human research protocol submissions March 31, following efforts to increase accessibility and enhance communication between the researchers, students and University administration.
Given the efforts to increase communication between the Institutional Review Board, the Research Protections Office and researchers, the review board has undergone significant changes in the way it handles protocol submissions.
"My experience with RPO is that they have been quite helpful in terms of guiding different project investigators to think about some of the ways they can consider IRB concerns. They have been more proactive," said Kenneth Wong, professor of education, chair of the department and vice chair of the advisory board.
The number of studies approved by the review board will depend on the number of graduate student projects proposed this year that involve human subjects, he said.
Over the past few years, the advisory board has been trying to instigate various reforms aimed at making the review process of the Institutional Review Board more accessible and efficient. The review board examines all research protocols that require the use of human subjects to make sure these protocols observe federal, state and local requirements and laws.
Potential reforms to the review process that have already been discussed include streamlining the Web site of the Research Protections Office, which is in charge of organizing and regulating the institutional review of human and animal research at the University, as well as removing restrictions on social science research that, in the past, made it difficult for students to get approval for their research, Wong said.
The protections office has undergone additional steps to increase communications between faculty, chairs and students of the department, Wong said. The changes allow students to increase the amount of support they receive from advisers and faculty in these areas. Whereas two years ago, faculty advisers would likely redirect student questions to the department Web site, the review board is looking to increase communication and contact within the department, Wong said.
"We're trying to make it more personal," he said.
Other possible changes to the review process include making the review board more efficient by holding campus-wide forums aimed at collecting feedback from students and faculty, as well as increasing the number of meetings held by the boards. "They are trying to institutionalize," Wong said. "In the last year, what we have accomplished is a good framework. I'm hoping to see more of the implementation now — campus-wide forums are an example of this, as is working more closely with the administration."
