This Article Full Text (PDF) References Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via Google Scholar Citing Articles via Scopus Google Scholar Articles by Taylor, H. A Articles by Sugarman, J. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Taylor, H. A Articles by Sugarman, J. Social Bookmarking                         What's this?

Enhancing communication among data monitoring committees and institutional review boards

Department of Health Policy and Management, Bloomberg School of Public Health and Berman Institute of Bioethics, Johns Hopkins University, Hampton House 353, 624 N. Broadway, Baltimore, MD 21205, USA, htaylor{at}jhsph.edu

Lelia Chaisson

BA Candidate, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD, USA

Jeremy Sugarman

Harvey M. Meyerhoff Professor of Bioethics and Medicine, Berman Institute of Bioethics and Department of Medicine, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD, USA

Data Monitoring Committees (DMC) and Institutional Review Boards (IRB) each can play important roles in protecting the rights and interests of research participants and ensuring the integrity of research. While both IRBs and DMCs have unique responsibilities, promoting a robust human research participant protection program requires integration of these efforts. Communication about DMC actions and considerations to IRBs is arguably an important component of integration. We sought to explore whether and how DMCs actions are currently communicated to IRBs as a basis for recommendations to improve such communications. Evidence of communication was sought in files related to research conducted by faculty, staff, and students affiliated with the Johns Hopkins Medical Institutions and the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health. Overall, we found a lack of consistency in the way that DMC actions are communicated to IRBs. While national policy encourages that actions taken by DMCs be communicated to IRBs and there is not a clear consensus about either who should be responsible for disseminating the information to the IRB or what information ought to be considered standard. Such standards promise to enhance the quality of ethics oversight of research. Clinical Trials 2008; 5: 277—282. http://ctj.sagepub.com

Clinical Trials, Vol. 5, No. 3, 277-282 (2008)
DOI: 10.1177/1740774508091262


CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter    What's this?