Simple jQuery Dropdowns
Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://repository.li.mahidol.ac.th/dspace/handle/123456789/32966
Full metadata record
DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorPornpimon Adamsen_US
dc.contributor.authorJaranit Kaewkungwalen_US
dc.contributor.authorChanthima Limphattharacharoenen_US
dc.contributor.authorSukanya Prakobthamen_US
dc.contributor.authorKrisana Pengsaaen_US
dc.contributor.authorSrisin Khusmithen_US
dc.contributor.otherMahidol Universityen_US
dc.date.accessioned2018-11-09T01:43:24Z-
dc.date.available2018-11-09T01:43:24Z-
dc.date.issued2014-11-18en_US
dc.identifier.citationPLoS ONE. Vol.9, No.11 (2014)en_US
dc.identifier.issn19326203en_US
dc.identifier.other2-s2.0-84914674871en_US
dc.identifier.urihttps://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?partnerID=HzOxMe3b&scp=84914674871&origin=inwarden_US
dc.identifier.urihttp://repository.li.mahidol.ac.th/dspace/handle/123456789/32966-
dc.description.abstract©2014 Adams et al. Tensions between researchers and ethics committees have been reported in several institutions. Some reports suggest researchers lack confidence in the quality of institutional review board (IRB) reviews, and that emphasis on strict procedural compliance and ethical issues raised by the IRB might unintentionally lead to delays in correspondence between researchers and ethics committees, and/or even encourage prevarication/equivocation, if researchers perceive committee concerns and criticisms unjust. This study systematically analyzed the efficiency of different IRB functions, and the relationship between efficiency and perceived quality of the decision-making process. The major purposes of this study were thus (1) to use the IRB Metrics developed by the Faculty of Tropical Medicine, Mahidol University, Thailand (FTM-EC) to assess the operational efficiency and perceived effectiveness of its ethics committees, and (2) to determine ethical issues that may cause the duration of approval process to be above the target limit of 60 days. Based on a literature review of definitions and methods used and proposed for use, in assessing aspects of IRB quality, an "IRB Metrics" was developed to assess IRB processes using a structure-process-outcome measurement model. To observe trends in the indicators evaluated, data related to all protocols submitted to the two panels of the FTM-EC (clinical and non-clinical), between January 2010-September 2013, were extracted and analyzed. Quantitative information based on IRB Metrics structure-process-outcome illuminates different areas for internal-process improvement. Ethical issues raised with researchers by the IRB, which were associated with the duration of the approval process in protocol review, could be considered root causes of tensions between the parties. The assessment of IRB structure-process-outcome thus provides a valuable opportunity to strengthen relationships and reduce conflicts between IRBs and researchers, with positive outcomes for all parties involved in the conduct of human-subject research.en_US
dc.rightsMahidol Universityen_US
dc.source.urihttps://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?partnerID=HzOxMe3b&scp=84914674871&origin=inwarden_US
dc.subjectAgricultural and Biological Sciencesen_US
dc.subjectBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biologyen_US
dc.subjectMedicineen_US
dc.titleIs your ethics committee efficient? Using "IRB metrics" as a self-assessment tool for continuous improvement at the faculty of tropical medicine, Mahidol University, Thailanden_US
dc.typeArticleen_US
dc.rights.holderSCOPUSen_US
dc.identifier.doi10.1371/journal.pone.0113356en_US
Appears in Collections:Scopus 2011-2015

Files in This Item:
There are no files associated with this item.


Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.