title: Ethics review of social, behavioral, and economic research: where should we go from here?
abstract: It is not unusual for researchers to complain about institutional review board (IRB) oversight, but social scientists have a unique set of objections to the work of ethics committees. In an effort to better understand the problems associated with ethics review of social, behavioral, and economic sciences (SBES) research, this article examinees 3 different aspects of research ethics committees: (a) the composition of review boards; (b) the guidelines used by these boards to review SBES--and in particular, behavioral health--research; and (c) the actual deliberations of IRBs. The article concludes with recommendations for changes in the review process and with suggestions for filling the gaps in knowledge about the way IRBs work.
authors.affiliation: Center for Bioethics, University of Minnesota, Suite N504 Boynton, 410 Church Street SE, Minneapolis, MN 55455, USA. devries@umn.edu
authors.forename: Raymond
authors.initials: R
authors.lastname: De Vries
authors.forename: Debra A
authors.initials: DA
authors.lastname: DeBruin
authors.forename: Andrew
authors.initials: A
authors.lastname: Goodgame
mesh_terms: D035841:Behavioral Research / Q000941:ethics* / Q000592:standards; D032802:Committee Membership; D003657:Decision Making / Q000941:ethics; D026724:Ethical Review; D028744:Ethics Committees, Research / Q000458:organization & administration*; D035082:Federal Government; D017408:Guidelines as Topic; D006801:Humans; D007258:Informed Consent; D018570:Risk Assessment; D014481:United States