Essay Sample on IRB: Safeguarding Human Research Participants

Introduction

A significant increase in the frequency of research that uses human subjects is observable. The IRB presents a functional administrative body that was set up for the primary purpose of protecting and safeguarding the welfare and rights of human research participants (Nurunnabi, 2014). More importantly, the IRB is concerned with human research subjects recruited for research endeavors performed under the portents of the institution linked to it.

Is your time best spent reading someone else’s essay? Get a 100% original essay FROM A CERTIFIED WRITER!

Save 25%

Among the essential responsibilities of the IRB is reviewing all research whose activities involve human subjects regardless of whether these researches are independently conducted or funded (Nurunnabi, 2014). Also, in these settings, the IRB serves as a protector of the privacy pertaining to the enlisted human subjects in research. In this regard, this body can monitor, accept, disapprove, and cause changes in any research doings that fall under its authority as is postulated in both the institutional and federal regulations policy.

The IRB Functions

The IRB further functions as an ethical committee whose mandate lies in reviewing, approving, and monitoring both behavioral and biomedical research whose subjects are humans (Nurunnabi, 2014). The protection against and the prevention of physiological and physical harm from befalling the human research subjects is the most pivotal priority of the IRB (Nurunnabi, 2014). The IRB's responsibilities and priorities stem from an increase in the existence of unethical practices linked to scientific research. A significant number of such research violated the rights, welfare, and privacy of human research participants necessitating for the designation of an administrative body by the federal government that would function as a streamliner for the myriad of research processes employed by research institutions to enforce the protection of the human participants (Enfield & Truwit, 2008).

Inasmuch as the composition of the IRB stands at five members, it is mandatory that the members making up the board be from different and diverse backgrounds with considerations based on sensitivity to community attitudes, cultural, and racial heritage. This requirement is aimed at ensuring and promoting not only respect but also objectivity in the IRB's advice regarding human research subjects. The board is further responsible for ascertaining that research activities are within institutional regulations and rules in line with the concerned federal laws in conjunction with the expected standards of practice and conduct on a professional basis, through reviews (Enfield & Truwit, 2008). This body is given the authority to outsource the competence and expertise of other individuals on specific topics to broaden further the perspectives and counsel offered by the board in light of safeguarding the welfare of vulnerable participants. However, voting priority is given to the members of the IRB so much so that the invited individuals are not allowed to vote in the ultimate decisions made by the board. In addition to primarily protecting human research subjects, the IRB also protects the researchers of the institutions with which it is affiliated. The way this happens is that researchers may be faced with conflicts between their desire to gain knowledge through research and the rights of human participants. Through the IRB reviews, the researcher gets to know whether their research proposals meet the ethical standards for human subjects (Enfield & Truwit, 2008).

Research Principles

Johns Hopkins Medicine is one of the most famous institutions that engage in research involving human participants derived from different populations; minorities, children, women, and cognitively impaired subjects (Mdabrow1, 2020). However, it is such that this research hospital fully recognizes and understands the need to safeguard the welfare of human research subjects. As such, the IRBs affiliated with this institution function as central citadels for the protection of any social research subject regardless of their background. In this light, Johns Hopkins Medicine has a standard set of guidelines provided by these IRBs that regulate the research practices and activities undertaken by the institution despite their sources of funding and location of research. Discussed herein are the three most critical guiding principles of all research conducted by this institution using human participants. The first principle, despite the population from which the human subject is taken from, is respect for persons. For the longest time, research in the past has involved practices that have entirely violated the respect aspect of the participants involved. Without even mentioning the popular Tuskegee and Nazi experimentations that include radiating human subjects, a multitude of researches have been performed in contempt and outright disregard for human life (Shivayogi, 2013). The research has failed to recognize these subjects as human beings and instead treated them as what is commonly referred to as lab rats. However, Johns Hopkins medicine follows that all human research participants ought to be afforded the utmost respect.

Justice

Justice and fairness present another core principle that governs human research conducted by this institution. Regarding these principles, the institution mandates that all participants of research be treated equally and fairly. The institution further recognizes that these vulnerable populations maybe lean more towards the acceptance of participating in clinical research due to their circumstances (Mdabrow1, 2020). However, in an attempt to prevent the unjust influence of research by the expected benefits to the participants, the institution engages in the promotion of grand awareness regarding what the participants will be subjected to if they accept to be part of the research.

Conclusion

Finally, the benefit and risk analysis principle is followed by the Johns Hopkins medicine in all its research involving human participants (Mdabrow1, 2020). It is such that all participants are made aware of the benefits to expect from their involvement in the specific research activities as well as the risks that may come with this involvement. In this regard, and in light of protecting the rights and welfare of these participants, the institution mandates that all its staff and faculty submit all research projects involving human participants for IRB review. Also, informed consent is an integral element allowing the institution to use the selected human subjects in their research projects.

References

Enfield, K. B., & Truwit, J. D. (2008). The purpose, composition, and function of an institutional review board: balancing priorities. Respiratory care, 53(10), 1330-1336.

Mdabrow1. (2020, July 7). Johns Hopkins institutional review boards: Baltimore, MD. https://www.hopkinsmedicine.org/institutional_review_board/

Nurunnabi, A. S. M. (2014). Institutional Review Board (IRB): its role and responsibility in making research ethical. Bangladesh Journal of Bioethics, 5(1), 5-10.

Shivayogi, P. (2013). Vulnerable population and methods for their safeguard. Perspectives in clinical research, 4(1), 53.